001p.m. We will start with the pledge of allegiance. If everybody could rise. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. Right. Well, thank you everyone uh for attending this meeting and also for those um watching from home and those watching from home in the future. Uh this is a um important meeting as we work on our school facilities and campus revitalization initiative. Um, tonight is featuring the SLAM collaborative presentation. Um, affectionately known as phase two. Uh, SLAM contracted with the board of ed earlier for phase one and this is the more detailed in-depth look uh called phase two. Um, I want to thank uh Jim Hoglin and Kent Moheart for attending
002tonight and also for their hard work on this presentation. I realize that it is uh a contract with our board of ed, but I know they have worked very diligently um to meet our um our accelerated schedule. So, I thank them for that and thank you for both for being here tonight. Uh tonight's presentation um will be very informative, but it's also long and it's also technical and it's also dense, but it is a critical report for our work as we move forward. And I think it's important to listen um because uh you realize or I realize anyway that it's all connected. So as the presentation rolls out, you realize that each section kind of uh builds on the prior section. So um I will turn it over to um Jim Hogan and Kent Mohart.
003And I also hope uh Jim that you will let us know when you want to stop and take some questions. Um it's not uh we are not um it's better if we don't interrupt as they go but Jim will try to stop at logical uh breaks and ask for board questions and then at the very end of the meeting we'll open it up for more board event questions and some of us a lot of us perhaps will have follow-up questions and that's fine too and I think if we could get our follow-up questions should we have them to Erica by the end of the week and she and Eric and Phil can go through them and try to organize them so they make some sense and forward them to SLAM and the ones that SLAM
004can answer given the purview of their work they will and other questions we will need to take up um as a board um or figure out where the information might come from in the future. So, our goal is to listen attentively tonight to ask the questions that we need to for clarification and then uh to take the time uh that we need to think about it and formulate more questions as we aim for as we aim towards a more robust or starting of robust uh board of ed um conversations amongst ourselves. Uh as you all know we have reviewed a lot of data done since 2017. We have developed very rough criteria for how to look at paths forward that would make some more successful than others. We've also asked for uh the educational perspective
005on different grade configurations if it comes to that. And then tonight we're looking at a very major major piece of work. So without further ado, I'm going to turn it over to um Jim and Kent. So the screen is yours and thank you. >> Great. Thanks. I'll I'll go ahead and share. Good. All right. Thank Thank you for having us. Um we we've done a couple of previews. Um we've had some discussions with with some of the folks that are on the meeting. Um Okay. Can everybody see my screen? Nope. >> It looks like it's coming now, Jim. >> Okay. All right, everybody see it now? >> I see it. >> Okay, good. All right. Um, so as as as Deb mentioned, um, we're we're going to try to get through this presentation pretty quickly.
006Um, there's there's four major sections and we have section divider slides after each. So, I think if if questions are going to be asked, it's probably going to be productive to do that on the divider slides. And I think that'll help Kemp and I move through the presentation as quickly as possible. Um, as she mentioned, there is a lot of information to get through here. Um, and we'll we may as well just get right into it. >> All right. Um, Kemp, did you want to want me to run through the first couple slides and transition or did you want to take Yeah, if you do if you could. Thank you. >> Okay. So, just stepping back um back at end of December, we were um we were brought on board. Uh phase 2 was approved.
007So, as soon as we were approved, we outlined a schedule and this is a fairly aggressive six or seven week schedule and there were some holidays involved. So, we assembled the team, hit the ground running. Um, and we had we had a pretty logical, methodical plan to get through all the information that we needed to. We had a fair amount of existing information that we had reviewed during phase one, but reviewed in in much more detail once phase two was approved. And then we had a timeline set aside to investigate a build new concept on site as well as a renovate to new concept. And that's really the charge of phase two is to compare those two options um and meet the state requirements for all the paperwork that's required uh moving forward for any
008kind of grant application and comparison. Um and then in the last couple of weeks we had our consultants develop narratives. Um and then we my architectural team also devel uh developed architectural narratives describing what the building was going to be constructed of. Um which then informed our estimates. So the estimate um took place over the last two weeks or so. Uh Kemp and I were able to um review that and finalize it over the end of last week. We had shared some numbers. We got some feedback from from the small working group and the dot the purple dotted line is where we are tonight and we're ready to to do our presentation. Um we'll take questions and feedback and then we will wrap up the final report and we'll be able to deliver that to
009you some you know sometime probably you know late next week perhaps and and that'll be a full comprehensive report um that you can take forward um and you know utilize with your grant application um you know all the state paperwork will will begin to be filled out. Um so I think we're in a good place right now. Um the next thing I wanted to do was just kind of back up a little bit, talk about the grant application schedule. Um and this is something we need to consider moving forward. Uh you know, we we hit the ground running. This is a really quick intense six, seven weeks. Um but with our eyes on the end goal um to set a referendum date um and understanding what that actually takes as far as town resolutions and
010who needs to make some decisions uh and the timeline that's going to be involved to to meet some of those goals. Um so this is just a real quick bulleted list of um you know understanding the middle school edspecs. um they were reviewed uh the the edspecs that were developed and approved in May of 24 was the basis of our exercise and we use those. Um but I believe that you know moving forward uh the the board is going to want to review that as well and just confirm that it is how they want to move forward with all of the spaces um and how the spaces are envisioned to operate look and function. Um and then uh the feasibility study and opinion and probable cause is is what we're delivering to you this evening.
011Um and then coming out of that there needs to be some questions, debates, and moving forward. Um this group is going to need to understand exactly what the timeline is to get uh town resolutions done and all of the things that would have to be in order for uh leading up to any kind of uh funding approval and the grant application through the state. Um this this goes back to the phase one. Um it defines well it's the state's definition of what renovation status is. Um it very clearly um gave us our marching orders when we're doing the design work and reviewing the existing building to see if it it was suitable and possible to uh renovate to new and meet the state standards. um which would then trigger some of the funding mechanisms that
012that you you would need to do. Um and then I I thought that this was a really good list that I wanted to bring back during phase one as we wrapped up and and presented to the board. Um we wanted you to think about the considerations of, you know, renovate to new or build new. um and some of the things that you're going to need to consider at and as as we show you actual drawings and designs for a new build and for renovate to new. I'd like everybody to kind kind of keep in mind what these bullet points are. And these are not necessarily pros or cons. They're they're truly considerations. They're things that you should be thinking about when we show you the design, looking at floor plans, um adjacencies of rooms, and
013things like that. Um we're going to get into a little detail talking about mechanical systems um all considerations that that you need to uh think about um as we go through this process. And then um just to remind everybody the checklist here the the 3520 is really the basis of of our exercise. We need to go through all of these items and prepare uh the the information for the grant application. And then uh the list on the right is really what we were charged with with phase two so that everybody understands um you know we're we're have the narratives I mentioned doing the architectural narratives. We also had a team of engineers on board that gave us um structural narratives, uh HVAC, uh electrical, plumbing, fire protection. Um and all of these engineers and experts
014spent a fair amount of time in the buildings looking through evaluating what's there, understanding what the potential of saving or reusing or adapting some of those programs and their ability to meet the renovate to new status that the state would be looking for. Um, and then Kemp and I will present the opinion of probable costs this evening. Um, I'm going to run through some conceptual site plans for the build new and the renovate to new. Um, and we did some uh work as far as evaluating the EDSPEC against the existing building, kind of backfilling some of those spaces. Um, we're going to present some floor plans. Um, and then based on feedback from from this group this evening, we'll be able to finalize a report and continue filling out the 3520. Um, so that's kind
015of where we are in the process right now. Just so everybody understands what the team has accomplished in this short six, seven week sprint. >> Thanks, Jim. Um, good evening everyone. Kemp Mohart with the Slime Collaborative. um principal with the firm uh registered architect in the state of Connecticut and uh I lead our K12 practice. So glad to be here tonight with you and Jim um as we present this uh the results of this study. Um the next series of slides is just a kind of a a couple of slides to remind everyone what the study basis is. Uh Jim already mentioned the the EDSP spec. We're going to speak a little bit about that, but we also wanted to go back to the enrollment projections. Um the the edspec that was developed and approved
016back in 2024 was based on the 2023 projections um which is in gray on the side list here. Uh and that was based on 573 students at the time uh for an 8-year projected high enrollment. And the reason the enrollment is so important is because it drives the allowable area at the state. I'm going to speak a little bit more about that in the next couple of slides. um but that allowable area um drives the eligibility factor and the cost of the project. Uh so for this study we did um work with the updated enrollment projections from 2025 November 2025 and it had a 8-year projected high of 554 students. So it went down slightly but still in the the mid 500 range. Next slide. As Jim mentioned, uh, we are using the educational specs
017that were developed back in 2024. Um, we did want to make a few comments about these ed, excuse me, about these edspecs. Uh, the quantity uh, and size of the proposed net spaces uh, seem appropriate. Uh the the edspec very closely resembles a uh a recent middle school that we've designed for this the town of Greenwich uh which is currently under construction. Um and so we view uh that this edspec really uh represents a 21st century modern middle school design from a uh a net square foot uh number of spaces perspective. the the one thing that we um did see in this that we didn't quite agree with was the the net to gross factor. And so we're going to talk a little bit about that in a couple of slides. Next slide. One thing
018I wanted to do is kind of give everyone a primer on what the office of grants administration uh eligibility factor is. So um I tried to put this quick uh equation. It's a pretty simple equation. It is based on building area and building area um allowable area at the state which is the the numerator in this quotient um is based on the enrollment. That's why the enrollment is so important. So what we call the net gross allowable area or NGAA is based on calculations um from state regulation. So the for a middle school 6 through 8 the state permits 168 square foot per student. Uh and then they also have a separate statute that allows a 1% um kicker on top of that number. So you do the math 168 * 554 and then you
019add 1% on on top of that. That becomes your NGAA. We're going to speak about that in another couple of slides. Uh the net gross area proposed is the area that is driven by your edspec. So it's driven by the the net square feet of the edspec. We're going to talk about that on the next slide in a moment. Uh and that quotient yields an eligibility factor. So, it's a value of 1.0 or less. Typically, it's less than 1.0. Uh, some sometimes we strive to to meet the allowable area exactly to to maximize reimbursement. Um, because that eligibility factor is then multiplied by the eligible costs for grant reimbursement. And we'll go into that a little bit more uh in depth, but I I did add a couple of bullets on the bottom. So the
020key points is if that is a 1.0 quotient, 100% of the eligible construction costs will be reimburseable at the district's state reimbursement rate. Um if it's below then then that um eligible construction is multiplied by that quotient that is below 1.0 and therefore reimbursement is slightly reduced. We'll we can come back for some questions on this if there are at the end of this section. Next slide, Jim. So, as we mentioned, um there was some concern of ours over the edspec uh what we call netto gross factor or net to gross ratio. Um the tecton spec is based on 574 students as we mentioned earlier which was the 2023 enrollment projections plus one student. The uh what we call the net square ft NSF uh is the full tally of all of those colored lines
021in this chart. And those those colored summary lines are space category summaries of a much more detailed list of spaces in each of those categories. So for example, the sixth grade academic classrooms line at the top has 11,678 square ft I think it is if I can read it. Um and there and that so that that 11,000 square foot number is comprised by several different numbers in a more detailed list uh within the EDSPEC and for each line that is true which yields in this case uh a total net square ft of 80,527 square ft. And then what we do um at SLAM is we take that net square feet and we we use our experience based on laying out several buildings over the course of our 50 years of architectural practice um based on
022a net to gross ratio that we see uh that we would expect for a building of this type. Um, when you take the math, when you do the math on what was in this EDSPEC for a gross square foot for the building of 10471, that yields a 77% net to gross ratio, which is much too high. We've never seen a building uh designed with that level of net to gross ratio. Typically, it's in the 60s range. So um that gave us some some pause and so we made some adjustments on the next slide. Oh actually before we get to the actual math on the adjustments these were the adjustments. So as I mentioned each one of those line items in that chart on the previous slide had a series of spaces that comprised the bottom
023line. So in this particular case learning commons you can see all those spaces. We agree with all the spaces that are in that list with one exception. Um the MDF which is the main distribution frame space for where your technology um uh fiber optic line will come into the building and and that's where all your server racks will reside. Typically we carry that in our net our gross up factor our net to gross ratio. So we don't want to double dip on that. So we are suggesting that we take that one out of the the space program. And then similarly building services um typically toilet rooms uh both boys and girls as well as all gender and mechanical and electrical rooms and uh other IDF closets which are also technology closets in a building like
024this. Uh we build that into our gross up net to gross factor. So again, we don't want to double dip on those. And so we suggest we back those out. And so you'll see that these two space categories we adjusted downward um by 200 ft for the learning commons and by um about 3500 or so 33 3200 ft for the um building services. Uh and the reason we do that the building services rooms specifically toilet rooms, mechanical rooms, all those types of spaces are layout dependent as well as code dependent. So that's why we typically put that into our net to gross factor to to prescribe a a very precise square footage for those spaces at this early stage is premature because uh often when you lay out a building um you might carve out
025a closet here there or somewhere else um and it's really difficult to control the square footage to that um prescribed amount in doing a building layout. So we we typically put that into our net to gross factor. Uh next slide please. So making those adjustments and doing the math based on our experience. Um this just summarizes it here. Um so we would reduce that 80,527 net square ft to 77,257. And then our experience for a building of this type uh is that the net to gross ratio would be anywhere from 62 to 64% when we're done with the design. Uh so we chose to use the middle just divide it right down the middle uh 63%. U for the purposes of the study. And so doing that math, we would expect a a final building,
026whether it's a new build or a renovation, to be somewhere around 122,630 gross square feet. Now, gross square feet is to the outside face of the exterior wall, and we're going to get into the details on that in just a moment. Uh because that's what you have to build. You have to build those walls. Um but the state looks at the area of the building to the inside face of the exterior wall. So we have to make some adjustments which we will on the next slide. I do want to say that the 62 to 64 uh net to gross ratio is very accurate. We just finished the uh the Greenwich Middle School and that was at a 62.8% net to gross when we were complete with the design. So we feel very comfortable using 63.
027Um I guess that's all I had the last point I wanted to make on that Jim. So next slide. Okay. So this is where it all comes together with the state allowable area. The the um chart on the top of this slide are the allowable area calculations. So, as I mentioned, the 8-year enrollment, peak enrollment uh of 554, grades 6 through 8 is the first line. The allowable area per calculation is or per regulation is 168 square foot per student. So, when we do that math, 554 * 168, we get the 9372 square ft. And then when we add the 1% statutory allowance, that brings that 93 number up to 943. So that's an important number because that's that NGAA I spoke about a couple slides back. Uh the net gross allowable area. That number
028is measured to the inside face of the exterior wall. Uh which is where the state measures it. And the reason they measure it there is because that's how the state building code measures building area. So as I mentioned on the previous slide, what's outlined in red there, the 122 630, that's gross square feet based on our net to gross ratio. And because we have to account for the costs to build the entire building all the way to the outside face of the exterior wall. That's why we track that gross square foot number. But in order to compare the overall building size with the NGAA, the state allowable, we need to subtract the thickness of the exterior walls. The way we do that at this early stage of the game is to simply reduce that 122
029630 by 5%. Because in our experience um the exterior wall thickness uh o over a building layout um would be anywhere from 4 1/2 to 5%. So we typically take the 5% at this stage. So that brings the 122 630 number to be 116791. And so that number is what's compared. That's the denominator in that quotient that I showed you on that slide a few slides back. And the 9403 is the numerator. When you do that math, we get the eligibility factor which is line four on the on the lower chart of 8049. So basically what that number is saying is the any eligible construction costs in this scenario would be multiplied by 0.8049 and that would essentially convert your reimbursement rates which are on line five. These are the two 2026 reimbursement rates. 22.14
030for renovation and 12.5 for new construction. It effect effectively reduces those to the 17.82 and 10.06 uh which is what we call the effective reimbursement rates and those are going to be the values that we used in the opin we use in the opinion of probable costs when we get to that portion of the presentation. Now, I know that was a lot um to listen to, try and follow and digest. So, we're going to take a pause here and ask for if there are any questions. Hey, Kemp, I have a quick question for you. This eligibility factor of 80, is that sort of what you typically see? What what's what's typically the range on that? You know, when you're doing other projects, is that well within the range? Is it outside the range >> for
031a middle school with using a teameing arrangement as you as you are with this edspec that's going to be pretty close to where you're going to expect to be uh when you have an enrollment in the mid 500s like 550 or so. Um if you know if your enrollment went up um you would you would get more allowable area. So then that quotient would would get closer to one. Um but because in in middle school teameming buildings um the kind of the sweet spot are multiples of 360 students. So if you had a school that was 720 students, you'd probably be closer to 1.0. But because your enrollment is at 550ish, um that's the impact. Does that make sense? Yeah. No, totally to totally makes sense. Look, I mean, this is all basically being driven
032by that enrollment number. All these other numbers, the 168, the um um the NTG ratio that you mentioned, all those are basically either you know required by law or you know good estimates for what you found in the past. And so everything goes off that five 554. I was just I was just curious as to on the eligibility factor. Um I guess it's driven Yes. Yes. It's driven by the number and it's also driven by the model. So that was uh something that I didn't appreciate. So thanks for that. >> Sure. >> If there no no other questions, um Jim, I'm going to pass it back to you to walk us through the site and the design concepts. >> Great. Yeah, that was that was the dense part of the presentation. I bet everybody didn't
033guess that they were going back to math class tonight. Okay, so I'm going to run through um some of the design sections that we did. The the team got together and as I mentioned, we spent a fair amount of time on site um walking through the building. So, you know, you are all very familiar with the building itself and the site that it sits on. So, I'm just going to do a real high level information um dump here that just some of the information that we used as part of our evaluation. You can see the the main entry that existing main entry on the right just a aerial for reference. You can see how um the building kind of fits into the site um just to the north of the high school. You can see
034how the playfields are configured, some of the parking areas, and these are all things that we considered as as we got on site. Um and I think more importantly the evaluation of potential new build sites that are you know within the constraints that we were given here. So, uh, nor in in this drawing, it shows really the whole contiguous site that starts with the intermediate school at the far south end. Um, shows the the high school in the middle, the existing middle school, um, at the northernmost part of the site as well as some of the associated ball fields. Um, so, you know, we we walked the whole site, tried to understand how the buildings work together. There are some shared fields, some shared parking. Um, you know, we try to understand how the buses
035arrived and left the site. Um, and and that began to inform some of our bigger design thoughts. So, now I've I've turned the site uh kind of 90° counterclockwise. So, north is now to the left. I think it just fits better on on the site or on the slides graphically. Um, but we're really focusing on the existing middle school. So the team got in here and as we walked the building uh we pulled some some mapping. We tried to understand where uh potential wetlands were. Um some of the setback requirements. Uh we looked at zoning requirements as far as setback you know front yard setback, sideyard setback. Um tried to understand some of the adjacent neighbors and some of the potential uh building pads and the uh effect that new buildings would have on some
036of the neighbors. Uh that was a consideration that that the team discussed as well as some of the utilities. Um I I think the the facility staff was phenomenal as we walked through the buildings. They were there as a resource. Um you know, and they gave us some insight. There was a an existing fiber optic line that was installed just within the last couple of years that goes from the corner of one one of the high school lots diagonal across the the ball field and ties into the middle school. um as well as trying to understand how some of the septic works. So on the north end of the site, the left side of the slide, you can see there's an exa existing septic line that comes in and under the road and ties in
037with those active leeching beds that are down under the the uh far north ball fields. Um and we found some existing documentation that showed some abandoned septic galleys that were built with the original school in 1962. Um so just as a real highlevel um kind of diagram and some of the things that the team considered um you know we can certainly come back to this for reference. Um but I I thought it was was useful and helping us determine where where we could put the building. Um ultimately we looked at I think three different potential locations for the new building and then working with a working group. Um we ended up coming back and and proposing a site and developing a building on that site which I'm going to share with you in a minute.
038Um the next section is actually renovate to new concepts. So does anybody have comments or questions on the site documentation portion? just these three slides that I showed you. Hearing none, we're gonna we're going to move right along. In the next two sections, we're uh we're looking at a renovate to new concept. And then lastly, I'll present a build new option. Um and then Kemp will come back around and we'll talk about some of the final estimates and and budget numbers that that we'll present. Um, so the renovate to new concept is is really I I think the impetus of the the phase two that we were hired to do. Um, I think everybody was concerned about how that existing building was functioning with some of the facility conditions assessments that that have been done
039in the past and the understanding that there are a lot of aging infrastructure systems that that need to be replaced. Um so the team got in we we got as much documentation um existing floor plans and um you know understanding some of the mechanical systems, electrical systems, plumbing systems as we could during our sitewalks. Um so just some some raw data here. This is just a diagram that depicts where that existing building uh is and and u the original building was built in the 60s. So the gray portion of of it was built in the 60s. That's the original portion. And then in the 70s there was a an sizable addition put on the building that that more than doubled the the original square footage. Um so we did some area takeoffs of the existing
040plans and um developed these diagrams and they backed up some of the numbers that that we had seen in previous reports. We wanted to confirm those numbers um because the overall square footage is the basis of how we estimate estimate any of the work that that's done at the back end of this report. Um so you know these these are the numbers that we're working with. Existing building is a little over 161,000 square feet. Um we broke off the existing community gym and pool as a separate number that 25 well 26,000 square ft which leaves about 135,000 for the existing middle school area. Um, and then I also broke down the original um, 1960s construction understanding that that was just shy of 50,000 square feet. And I think that plays into the extent of renovations
041that that we have to do as well as some of the state um, statutes that that guide renovate to new that definition. Um, we need to understand how much of the building um, we're actually going to be able to renovate to meet the criteria and maximize your dollars. Um so a lot of these numbers are are really important for um the estimates and the reimbursement conversation that we're going to have at the back end of this evening. Um the other thing one of the other things that the team did as we got into the building and walked it um we wanted to understand how the building is currently being used. Um because one of the things we heard early was you know the building is oversized for the number of students that are in there.
042There used to be a lot more students there. Um, so we wanted to understand how all of the spaces in the school are being utilized. Um, so the team walked and and we we uh stuck our head in every single one of the rooms so that we knew that, you know, this classroom was a seventh grade English classroom. This classroom is a Spanish classroom. Um, this is a a gym storage closet. So we identified each and every room um and then backed up some of that against the square footages that we're looking at. Um so this is really how the team familiarized themselves with the building. Um so as the architects were walking, the engineers were also walking. So as we got into the main boiler room, the engineers spent a lot more time looking
043at that space. Um the architects were a little bit more interested in some of the educational spaces. But I think it was absolutely critical for the entire team to be in the building and understand how it functioned. Um kind of what what was working and what wasn't working educationally. Um and then coming out of that walkthrough, what we did was a diagram here that maps all of the spaces and and how they're currently being used and match it back up against the proposed EDS spec. Um, and this is how we go about creating an apples to apples comparison. Um, the EDS spec is is kind of intended to be uh a new build because, you know, obviously you're going to list square footage in a a space and with a new build, you can match
044that space identically. um with when you're dealing with an existing building and you get into a space and the edspec says that the classroom is supposed to be 825 square ft and we're now understanding that we have a whole series of classrooms that are 764 square ft and 791 square ft. Um we thought that it was important to understand where those overages and underridges were um over over and unders. So we diagrammed it. We tried to simplify it. Red dots on this diagram show spaces that fall underneath the proposed edspec um the target in the edspec and the green dots are spaces that um exceed the square footage proposed in the edspec. Um, and I found it interesting that predominantly the te the spaces that were undersized or on the right hand southern part of
045the building u many of those classrooms are unders sized compared to what you want to do with a modern 21st century um facility. And then uh the spaces on the north end um predominantly the the sixth and seventh grade classrooms are all over the proposed square footage um that you talk about in the edspec. Um and then some of the core spaces are over under your gym. Both your gymnasiums are under what you want to build in the edspec. Cafeteria is a little bit over. The media center is a little bit over. Um none none of those really surprised me because of the era of the building. Um and education has changed. Um but again, this was really informative to the team that walked the building. And coming out of that, we were able to
046create a spreadsheet. uh you're not going to be able to read this and the intention really isn't for you to do that, but just to take some of the core academic classes. So, this um uh chart came directly out of your edspec and it highlights all of the sixth grade academy. So, the two teams in the sixth grade, you end up with um you know, eight classrooms, two science labs, a science prep room, a flex classroom, some storage, some of the specialed spaces, and then all of the square footage that's desired for a new build are delineated here, added up. So, it's, you know, a little under 12,000 square ft of net square ft. Um, so we created a spreadsheet and we tried to map all of the existing spaces, some of them under, some
047of them over. Um, and connect all the sixth grade classes as they're currently being used in the building to the proposed ed spec and try to align some of those. Um, and again, I think this really helped the team understand what the right thing to do with uh the building and and that renovation. Um, so the base plan, this is just a diagram that shows some of the spaces that we were trying to identify mechanically. Um, I think it's critically important any renovate to new to know where the main boiler rooms are and where your main runs are from those boiler rooms to heat the entire building as well as electrical rooms and and IDF, MDF rooms, all of those. um because there's some u major expenses that that come into play when you start
048moving spaces like that. So the team it it was important for the team to identify those gray spaces which are predominantly mechanical, electrical, plumbing spaces and then the peachcoled uh spaces here are all windowless classrooms. So we looked at it from an educational standpoint. Um you know there's a whole series of science classrooms in the heart of the building that don't have windows. Um, none of the art rooms, well, three of the four art rooms do not have windows. Um, you know, there the band room does not have windows. There's a couple of classrooms. Um, so educationally, we knew that part of our approach in the renovation needed to be to correct those problems. Um so as as we ran through uh the team I think developed I think three or four different approaches and
049again we worked with the working group got some feedback and we developed one of them. So and and just to remind everybody this is a test fit. It's not a final design. It's not what you have to build. Um it's really intended as a test fit to make sure that we can accommodate all of the program spaces um in the EDSspec and right size them within the overall footprint of this building. Um so what one of the things I mentioned early was this building is bigger than what the edspec calls for. So we immediately started thinking where can we demo part of the building to downsize it and rightsize the building. Um so and that was part of our approach with with was phasing this construction. Um another criteria is the students have to remain
050in this building while you renovate it. And you know the trick is how do we move the students around safely um con you know complete all the construction that we need to in in the timeliest manner that we we possibly can because time is money on uh some of these renovation projects. And if they start getting stretched out too far, you're uh you're you end up just spending money on the construction and the phasing and not necessarily the educational quality. Um, so there what we're proposing is a three-phase renovation. Phase one would tackle the the far south end of the building. Um, and we would uh to to kick all that off to create the space that we needed. Um, we're proposing 12 portable classrooms that will be in place through the entire uh length
051of construction beginning to end. um which gives us enough swing space because we're taking big chunks of the building offline and we just we can't accommodate all you know 594 students in twothirds of the building at a time. So I think this gives us the wiggle room that we need to in a major renovation. Um so phase one would take over the south end. We would create all of the seventh and eighth grade classrooms and their um associated support spaces. So, we'd have a seventh grade team in this area with a seventh grade science. We'd have a seventh grade team on the east side of the building of that wing with uh science and a flex room. And each of those wings would get new toilet facilities. And then the far south wing would be
052converted to eighth grade classrooms. Um where eighth grade science would be here, another science, and then their flex room would be in the middle with some faculty and staff space to oversee all of that and some uh major renovated bathrooms in in the courtyard in that existing location. And then the other big move that we would we would make because we we discovered that both of the gyms are undersized and it's really difficult to expand a gym and rightsize it. So, what we were proposing with some of those bigger teched spaces, which can uh do really well with some higher ceilings, their loudspaces, um actually take over the existing gymnasium, carve that up and put all of the um project leader way spaces in there, um or lead the way. Teched, robotics, um and culinary
053would all be located in this section and be renovated in in phase one of of that work. Phase two moves to the middle portion of the building. So now the full south end of the building would be complete and fully occupied. So all of these classrooms are functional. Uh the temper the portable classrooms leave are are left in place and then we renovate the entire center of the building. Um and that that in includes the cafeteria, the existing cafeteria which would uh be fully renovated, the kitchen associated with the cafeteria in the back. And then um all the art rooms in this location turn into the music rooms. And the big move here is in the middle where we're uh currently have all those science rooms. We're proposing to demo all of those and create
054a new courtyard which then drives light into the middle of the building. And now the band room, art rooms, and the new learning commons all have natural light into a shared courtyard in the middle. and it helps us eliminate some of that square footage that that the building is oversized by. Um, and then the front of the building gets a full renovation with the new main office and a nurses suite with some new public toilets right at the front door. Um, and I think as part of that, we'd probably do some accessibility renovations at at the front door there. um which would entail some ramping and um getting uh disabled and ADA access to the front part of the building which currently doesn't doesn't exist. Um the third phase of this work moves to the
055far north end of the building. So now this whole portion of the building is is fully operational. Um and the last piece would be to demo the existing uh classrooms which are all oversized at this point and then turn the existing media center into a sixth grade academy. So you end up with two sixth grade teams with the sixth grade science rooms and a flex classroom and their toilet facilities um pretty much where the existing middle uh uh media center is uh currently. And then the last piece of the puzzle would be to build a brand new gymnasium at this portion of the building um with an associated stage. Um and what the design team talked about was building the stage in this location so that one side could open up to the cafeteria for
056smaller performances. You could set up some some audience chairs on the cafeteria side and look at the stage this way. Or you could close the the southern side of the stage, open up the north side and uh have a larger seating capacity on the gymnasium side. So your your public assembly spaces are really kind of focused on on the back side of the building here. Um and then the last piece of that would be to um do your associated site work because there is some demo happening at the far south end uh where those classrooms get taken down. we would um rejuvenate the site in that area and then take down the uh the temporary classrooms. So this this is your final plan. Um and the design team thinks it's a lot more efficient than
057the the sprawling building that exists right now. Um we tried to um simplify the circulation quite a bit and reorganize the teams um so they could all easily work together. Um so you can see that the sixth grade kind of acts almost as a sixth grade academy with easy access to all of the um specials. They they you know right around the corner from the music rooms the learning commons the front door and the nurse and then the older students the seventh and eighth graders get looped into this uh circulation corridor that comes back around. Um, so I I think it's a real efficient layout. And the nice thing is that the square footage matches up almost identical to the proposed square footage that Kemp was talking about, that 122,000 square ft. Um, and it
058allows us to do the apples to apples comparison with a new build and the rate renovate to new. Um, so I think at that point, yeah, I'll just show you what the site would look like. It doesn't change all that much. Um, so what you see in white would be the final building after renovation. Um, we've isolated the gym and pool piece. Um, so you can still there's still a potential to connected to the building. Um, but I I've heard a desire to just se completely separate that and have it function as a community space um that would be accessed off the the lower bus drop over in here where the parking is. And again, I mentioned the main entry remains where it is, but we would do some extensive ramping and ADA access on
059that corner of the building. Um, and then we would restore the site on the far uh north end after construction uh demo happened on on that area. Um, and everything else would uh pretty much operate exactly the way it is. The buses would still stack along this portion of the the site, the the western portion. Um, we would still have an access drive that comes all the way in and around the back. The parent loop comes through. You would still have access to that play area. Um, the white dotted line is where those temporary um, classrooms would be located throughout construction. Um, so I I think it's a real efficient plan. Um, we haven't really disturbed this the site circulation all that much. Um, and and I think it could remain pretty much operational through
060the length of of construction. And then the final diagram I wanted to show you here was uh some of the area takeoffs. So the different color code the the gray is the portion of the building that we would demolish. So you can see the far north end as well as that courtyard that I had mentioned. Um the blue is new construction. So, this would be the new gymnasium with the stage and platform as well as some of the changing rooms and a small lobby that would kind of would connect the existing cafeteria and the new gym. Um, and then I mentioned as we walk the building, we're we're actually proposing to fill in this courtyard because there's only one room that looks in and utilizes that for natural light. Um and we decided that during
061the phasing the first phase uh it would be an ideal place to locate a new m uh electrical room. So our electrical engineer proposed putting new electrical service in this space and then we could easily feed you know back feed the the phase one work and then the phase two and three work. Um he thought that would work really well. Um, and then the toilets that are in uh this portion of the building kind of bump into that courtyard are undized and based on the dimensions right now there there would be no way to make those fully accessible. Um, so we proposed tearing that piece of the building down and building something new right there that would accommodate new toilets um staff workrooms um and offices in that area. So, uh, that was the design
062approach that the team took and I think the plan worked out pretty well. And again, this is a test fit. Um, what one of our goals was just to make sure we could accommodate all of the proposed spaces in a logical manner within, you know, the the extent of uh the existing footprint. Um, and and I think I think we we accomplished that. And then we used again we used these square footage numbers in the estimate that Kemp's going to share at the end. So I'm going to stop here. Any questions on the renovate to new option test fit that we're looking at. >> Hey Jim. Jim two two quick questions for me. I'll jump in. Yeah. >> Um first one first one was did did you contemplate sort of the time frame for each
063one of those phases in terms of you know completing >> uh completing the renovations? That's number one. And then number two is uh phase two effectively splits the building in half. Do you do you envision I don't know some sort of way to connect the two or are they are they going to have se completely separate entrances and they're not going to be able to connect in and there's not going to be any free flow between the two waves. >> Yeah. So the I'll I'll take that one first because yeah we did talk about keeping at least one of the corridors open through construction. Um so we're showing it as one phase. I'm I'm thinking that it's going to be more of phase 2 A and 2B so that they can shift their work and
064always maintain that north south connection between you know the far far ends of the building. Um I think that would be really important. Um and then yes, Kemp's going to share a schedule at the at the end. So the schedule ties directly into the estimate. Um so we've designated um timelines for each and every one of the phases and that allowed us to assign some escalation costs as well to a midpoint of construction for each of those phases. Um so Kemp will run through that at the end. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yep. >> I have a quick question for you there. um the portables >> as we're so during phase one you're talking about working on the south um end of the building and that's where grade 8th grade is currently primarily um located
065with some seventh grade now correct >> yes >> okay so do you see those students all then going into the portables during phase one or how is it you see you know se all of eighth grade and part of seventh grade during phase one where you see them residing Yeah, I I think we we've sized the portables. Um we're showing 12 spaces out there and in my mind that will house an entire grade and be it you know the eighth grade because that's the first phase they get displaced. It would make sense to move the eighth grade in there. So you you essentially have eight classrooms, two science labs and then two other spaces that you could use for special ed specials um you know support staff. We're going to need some toilets out there.
066Um, so I I think in theory those those portables could house an entire grade and then they would just come back into the building for their specials and travel back and forth, >> you know. >> Yep. >> All right. So, so that means it basically would have one grade going in there. So, eighth grade would go in there the first time around. During the second time, uh, seventh grade would already be in the new wing with the eighth grade. So, I'm assuming nobody would be in the portables, but maybe we'd have specials or some sort of like special ed or pull out or something in there. And then during the third phase, sixth grade, of course, would go into the portables. But my question too is in the final project here, >> and this actually
067goes in hand inhand with one of the other questions I had about square footage. Um, in the final project, can you show me where we're going to see special ed and um the smaller classrooms? Where are they going to reside in the in the structure? >> Yep. So, let me back up a couple of slides here. So, we've designated some spaces. You can see, you know, some of these spaces, these are sped classrooms, full-size classrooms, and then we have a suite that can be broken into some smaller classrooms. Um, so, you know, and the blue spaces are faculty and staff workrooms. Um, the gray are storage. So we we've made every attempt to accommodate the square footage. Um and the overall square footage matches up with with the intended, you know, that 122 square,000 square
068feet. Um so it it's diffic it's difficult with a graphic like this to label each and every space, but the team the design team's done a really nice job of going through and making sure that they are all accounted for. Um and again we're we're treating this as a test fit and it's not a final design. So we're really going through the exercise of confirming that we have enough square footage to accommodate all the spaces and not going to the time and extent you know you know a design process lasts a year and we need to talk to end users understand adjacencies of spaces. Um, which is why I said, you know, this is by no means the final design, but it brought comfort to the design team that we can accommodate the square footage
069and, you know, the details of of how it all fits together, in my opinion, can work pretty nicely. >> Okay. All right. So then my next question to you is by eliminating what's currently the science labs and turning it into a courtyard, does that then if it's a courtyard, does that actually count as square footage since it's within the exterior walls? >> No. No, it does not count as square footage. >> Okay. All right. And that my next question then had to do with how is it that they um determine what the square footage is. So for example, in a special ed class, there's not going to be the same number of students as there would be in a gened class. So, is there is there a different um requirement for special ed classrooms or
070is it the same? >> Yeah. Yeah. And we took all that right from the edspec that was developed in May of 24. They they were really specific about each and every one of the spaces, how many staff was going to be in that space, how many students would be in that space, the activities that were going to take place, what kind of equipment they needed in there. Um, so based on our review, we we were comfortable with how all the all of those spaces were described. Um, so I I I think it I think it's fine. >> Okay. >> And Sharon, I think um I think if I'm understanding your question, um, within the space standard at the state level, it's all in that blended number. So the 168 per student plus the 1% it
071accounts for for a comprehensive middle school with all the you know respective spaces that go along with it within that number >> right I guess well the reason I was asking is because one of the first slides it showed a variety of classrooms that were right-sized unders sized oversized right so I was trying to determine how I mean obviously there's some sort of a a metric that the state is using and so I was trying to figure how that applied to, you know, smaller pull out classes and things like that. So, all right. >> Yeah. And it looks like when when interviews were done with staff for the original ed spec that we're working off, um I think in the interviews the teachers were saying, you know, I'm I'm a you know, what whatever the
072special ed role was. I typically work with three or four students at a time in a group and I need a space, you know, that's you know, houses this, I need to store that. and the design team um previously said, you know, we think that a a space of 250 square feet could accommodate that use. Um, but what's happening now in the in the building, and this is interesting, is that that program that has three or four students cycling through is sitting in a full-size classroom, you know, and they're utilizing a 752 square ft classroom, whereas, you know, so that's where that green dot happened. You know, that space is too big for the use that it is. But because the entire building is oversized, you know, programs have been able to move into spaces
073that are a little more generous. >> Right. Okay. All right. That's it for me. >> Jim, I have a quick question which you may have covered and I may have missed it. >> Okay. So, back in May of 24 when we looked at the ED specs, >> at the time the square footage was around 96,000 square feet and now we're back to 13,000 square feet. >> Did you 22? >> Yep. >> 22. Okay. Did I may have missed it. Did you cover why in May of 2024 it was uh the 96,000 97,000. Now we're 122. Yeah, that that was Kemp's original conversation. The the math that we were doing in that first portion. Um Kemp ran through some of the assumptions that were made originally and then I I think the list of net square
074net square feet for all the spaces that were identified we agreed was the right number of spaces and the right amount of square footage for each of those spaces. The issue that we had when we evaluated was the net to gross factor. So, you know, you you know, I don't know if we want to go back to those slides. >> I can speak to that, Jim. Um, probably from memory, but you're right. The the 96 or 97,000 square feet was actually the allowable area from the state based on 573 students. But because the current projections have the enrollment projection has dropped to 554. That's why the difference between that 97,000 I don't remember the exact number it was but and where we are now at 94003 for the what we call the NGAA their net
075gross allowable area. Um, and then the EDSPEC from 2024 had a gross building size of 104701. That's where we took issue with that. You to get 80, they had 80,500 and change net being put into 10471 gross and we just don't see that happening. So when when we reduced their net because we felt there were some spaces that are that are typically in our net to gross ratio factor. Um we actually reduced the net program to 77 527 if I'm remembering the numbers correctly. And when we gross that up it that's where we arrived at the 122630. >> Okay. We could go back to the slides if we want to toward the end, but I think um let's come back to that if there's questions about that. >> Okay. And one other question relative to
076classroom sizes and I think it was Jim who had said that with the larger or the oversized classrooms, it actually gave us flexibility. So, if we rightsize this building and we wind up with smaller classrooms, being that we have this dynamic enrollment, um are we pigeon holing ourselves because now we have smaller rooms that might not be dynamic? I don't think so. um the the square footage of the edspec for the loading factor of uh I believe it was 24 students per classroom maximum. >> Yep. >> Um is is more than sufficient. We have um we typically use a range of 32 to 36 net square feet per seat in a classroom. And if I'm not mistaken, I think uh the what is it? 825, Jim, for the classroom. >> The 825 um divided by
07724. Let me just do that real quick. >> That's 34.375 net square feet per seat. So that's right in the middle of the range that we typically see for net square feet per seat in a classroom of, you know, a modern 21st century classroom. that facilitates, you know, face forward learning, but also small group learning. Um, so we're we're very comfortable with those numbers. >> Yeah. I think another thing to consider is the middle school teaming model because you end up with four classrooms per team, two teams per grade. So automatically you have eight classrooms and then you start to look at your enrollment and it's going to feel a little different than if you were just planning a regular elementary school where you say okay we have 500 students you know if we're going
078to put 20 students in each of those classrooms this is how many classrooms we need. So the middle school model is a little bit different and it it it creates I I think we need to be thoughtful about how we evaluate that the middle school model because it there's there's some different rules that that we follow. Okay. All right. Any more questions on the renovate to new portion? Okay, I'm going to move into the the build new concept and then we'll we'll show you some numbers. Um, so as I mentioned, we uh workshopped early in the process and looked at a couple of different options and we felt that the location uh that sat between the existing middle school and the existing high school was probably the best place for a new build. Um it
079didn't impinge on any of the existing ball fields except for kind of the practice field, the practice ball field. And uh we were able to to continue operating uh the site uh kind of unimposed the um new new build construction would not affect any of the circulation paths for the middle school or the high school. So we thought, you know, it phased out quite nicely. So, what this test fit proposes is kind of a U-shaped building on the existing softball field. Um, we would leave the existing gym and pool structure in place, but it becomes a standalone building and then, um, maintaining the existing drive that comes in, all of the existing parking, and then extending that loop up and around the existing building and then creating a new parent loop that would come in
080right through by the new main entry and then come back out. and new visitor parking, staff parking up um in this portion of the building. Um so then this U-shaped building sits uh we would bring a service area in. I'll show you the floor plan. The cafeteria is located in this general area, the the new building. So we bring service in at this level. Um do a little play area directly off of that cafeteria. And then once the new building gets built, all the students and staff move in there. And then we tear down the existing building which is currently in this portion of the site and then replace the ball field that gets displaced um in the location where the new building is. Um so we just put a couple of bullet points so
081everybody kind of understand the general approach there. Um and then this is how the floor plan works out. And again, uh, you know, with a new build, we're able to target that 122,000 square feet. And we're, you know, right within, you know, half a percent, I think, you know, with this test bit. Um, but I think it gives us a an opportunity to organize the building a little differently than than what you're um stuck with in the existing building. Um, so this U shape um creates uh three wings. So what we're proposing is a sixth, seventh, and eighth grade three-story classroom wing in this portion. So on the main level, um the sixth grade classrooms are located here. The seventh grade classrooms would sit on the second floor and the eighth grade classrooms on the
082third floor. So each of those two team grades would be identical and stack. So, we'd be able to stack toilet rooms, um, all the plumbing, uh, the, you know, we'd locate a new elevator, a main stair, we'd have, um, emergency stairs at either end of the corridor, um, and a flex classroom in the middle for each of those grades. Uh, then the main entry, I I mentioned that that new parent loop comes right in through here, which gives uh, really good parking access to the upper entry of the gym and pool. And uh students would then walk down, come in the main entry. Uh the blue box here is the main admin. Uh you'd have the nurses suite on the other side of the main entry. Um and then you'd have a teacher workroom. Um
083so we're grouping all of the adults kind of right central in the building here. Um and then the west wing over on this side is a singlestory wing, but it houses all the community spaces. So this is the media center. Uh the new library, the new gymnasium would be built here with its associated um ex you know gross motor skills room, the changing rooms, um gym office and then the platform is located here adjacent to the cafeteria um and the kitchen. Um I did mention that the the service would come in on the first floor from uh the high school side. So, we'd have a little service yard here that would access the the kitchen. Um, and then the eastern wing over here houses all of the specials. So, um, Project Lead the Way. So,
084we'd have teched spaces, robotics, the culinary program, all located here. Um, you'd have two band rooms up in here. Um, then you'd have orchestra and coral. Um so all the music rooms are located at the end of that one-story um wing and then the two art rooms would be grouped here with a kiln room in between the two of them. Um and then you know we would locate some student toilets along here. Um so I think it's a nice simple building and again it it kind of checks all the boxes with the edspec. We've accommodated accounted for all the spaces that are desired in a fairly simple straightforward configuration and then this became the basis of uh the estimates and and what we we uh started looking at from an applestoapple standpoint. So I'll I'll
085take questions on on the new build. I think this is pretty straightforward, but I'll take some questions before we get into the opinion of probable cause. Okay, no questions. Everybody's interested in the cost. We'll turn it back over to Kemp. All right, thanks Jim. Okay, so as Jim mentioned, um, schedule drives cost uh, as well as square footage and an approach to the project. So, what we've done is built two different schedules. One on top for the renovation to new and one on bottom for the the new construction. If you look at the left portion of each of these bar schedules, you'll note that the pink bar is where we are today, where we're in the process of uh the first two quarters of 2026 are the feasibility study. Um the grant application preparation process.
086The the star there at at the end of May represents um the uh town council uh authorization of funding. So that's that's essentially um at at a minimum establishing the referendum and the referendum could occur later in the year uh per state statute. But you see that that first six six-month period uh being that grant application process. The light green immediately adjacent to that represents a year for the grant uh process to be processed at the state level. uh with the understanding that you know it if it's approved uh it would be approved and ratified by the legislature in May June time frame of 2027. Um you'll also note the blue bar that represents about a 16-month period of time for design and uh design estimating and approvals at the state level to bid the
087project. And you'll note that both both project schedules basically carry the same time frame all the way up through a 3-month bidding period. Um, and we anticip, you know, this anticipates a schedule where bids would be received and and contracts could be signed by the March time frame of 2028. Um, and then that's where the schedules uh start to diverge from one another. So we'll start with the one on top the um renovation to new that first six fivemonth period or so um is where we foresee the portables being built. Uh and that would occur while the students are in the the balance of the existing building. Um those portables can be can be built and and get get them ready by the uh 2829 school year. um and they could be that could be
088done without disrupt disrupting the students in their current space. Then phase one is a 13-month period where that whole southern portion of the building uh is renovated um and you're also using the portables at that point in time. So that's the portables act as swing. And then I have these uh four pointed stars that represent, you know, when students will move back in to the various spaces. So you'll you'll note for the 2930 school year, that southern portion will be now renovated and occupied. And then we move into phase 2 beginning in July of the summer of 29. Again, another 13-month period for that center renovation piece. and then move into that by the 203031 school year. At that point in time, uh we we can start demoing the northernmost portion of the school um
089to make to make way for the uh the pad for the new gym. Um and we foresee the first two months of that summer being sufficient to take down the I call the northeast um wing uh where the overlap is for the new gym. Um and then the balance of that demo can occur while the renovation of the remaining portion remaining northern portion of the existing building occurs in that final phase. And then we have uh a four-pointed star representing the you know the final phase being occupied for the school year 203132. Uh and then a small purple bar for project closeout. Uh so that is a bit of an extended schedule. It has uh you know at least 3 years plus of construction activity uh and moving students around the building. It's, you know,
090a phased renovation as much as we work hard to avoid disruption to the students, it is disruptive and we have to acknowledge that. Um, but uh we do our best to to minimize that disruption. looking at the schedule on the bottom. Uh same front end u through bidding as we talked about for the renovation project, but then we go right into new construction and that would occur south of the existing building in that U-shaped that uh building that um Jim just showed us. And we we anticipate a 22-month construction period for that. Um and so that building and right now we're targeting a potential for movein midyear. Um now we all know that midyear moves can be um a little bit trying at times but it does happen. We we have we just had a
091project on a big high school in Hartford that had a mid-year move in uh as well as one in Torington. So it can happen. It just takes a little bit of orchestration. Um, and it's it's most easy when you're moving into a new building. So, um, you're essentially moving, uh, teachers and and their belongings. Um, and everything else is new and then you take down the old building. So, that's the, uh, the reddish bar represents the demo of the existing building for about a year and then and then uh, and that includes the restoration of the site or where that building currently resides. and then the closeout period. So, you can see the new build gets the students in much more quickly um with much less disruption. And I think that's a a strong consideration
092when we look at the numbers because the numbers are pretty close together. Um, so I guess that bottom that bottom bullet where we we're recommending commencing design this summer, uh, assuming that you put a grant application in because you don't want to lose that year. Uh, some districts may choose to wait for the grant to be authorized by the legislature, but if you lose that year, this whole schedule gets pushed to the right. um and you're just going to have that much more impact with escalation. So the reason we had that overlap of the design and the grant application approval is um because it's relatively small costs to move the design forward um in the short term but and and the savings you get by not extending the escalation are a real consideration. Any questions
093on the schedule before we jump to the numbers? Okay, let's go to the numbers. So, we have uh we've developed detailed estimates uh for each scenario and as as uh Jim mentioned the the schedule impacts the the escalation for each of those components. So in the renovation scenario, each of those uh phased components of construction, we've accounted for escalation for those different phases to be escalated to the midpoint of construction. Um so looking at the top we see and what I've done is u I've created a range because at this level of study it's really in my opinion it's not um appropriate to just put a singular number out there. Um, so what I do is, you know, we estimate it, we arrive at a singular number, but then I put a two and a
094half percent plus or minus range on it because I really think it is a range at this point. Um, and so uh, we see the renovation scenario being a range from 134 12 million uh to about 141.4 million in cost. Um and looking to the middle column, the range uh for the cost to Weston, we foresee uh 118.8 to about 124 12 million being the local share with the state share being the final pair of columns of anywhere from 15.5 to 16.9 uh million. And that's based on that um adjusted effective reimbursement rate. And also another factor um in each estimate I have a a line item for other ineligibles because every project has other ineligible costs. Um even the new construction. um the state will not pay for uh will not allow for eligibility
095for costs off the the property line. So when we have utility connections and so forth, um there will be some things that are that are ineligible. Um the percentage that I carry for the new construction is is less than what I carry for renovation, but uh those are factored in there as well. So looking at the new construction, we see a range of 136 uh and change to 143 um and and then uh with a western share of one just under 128 to 134.2 and a state share of uh 8.1 to 8.8. Now I do want to run through the notes because they are important. um built into these estimates. Uh I already mentioned number one which is the 2.5% range on either side. Um the figures are rounded to the nearest $100,000 because again
096I think at this stage we don't need to follow u or track anything below that. um they include escalation to the midpoint of construction for the respective project phases and the numbers that I carried are four and a half% for 2026 um and then 3 and 12% per year for subsequent years and I suggest and I say refer back to the schedule for the various components um they include each estimate includes 3.5 million as a budget line item for sustainable initiatives and those are sustainable initiatives that are in and above a standard con code compliant building. Uh so if you wanted to upgrade from a you know a more a standard code compliant mechanical system uh which is the baseline of these estimates uh you could to perhaps incorporate geothermal wellfield or photovoltaic rooftop photovoltaics
097uh or ground mounted photovoltaics. Um there's some flexibility flexibility built into these numbers. Uh each of these estimates also includes a 10% design and estimating contingency and a 3% construction contingency which is typical for the industry at this stage of a project. Um we we typically see and we also have assumed that it would be a construction manager at risk delivery which is why we're carrying that 3% construction contingency. Um they they also include owner soft costs and a 5% owner contingency on the entire u project cost. Um I already mentioned the anticipating anticipated other ineligible costs at 4% for new construction and 6% for renovation. And then uh items 8 through 11 are speaking about the uh eligibility factor number eight which is the 0.8049 and the two um reimbursement rates for new new
098construction andor renovation. And then of course you know these the costs that are being presented here are not guaranteed but they're you know I'm I'm pretty confident they'll be within these ranges. Um, so with that, I will open it up for questions. >> I'll jump in with a question. I have a couple of questions actually, so I'll jump in with a couple of quick ones. Um, I just did some quick math. The cost difference between the new construction and the renovate is new looks like if you take the high costs, it's less than a 1.1% premium. and the upside looks well worth that kind of premium. Um I remember at one point you shared with us that there was a town that could demonstrate the cost to uh renovate as new was similar to build
099new and they were able to qualify for reimbursement for uh they got the renovate as new reimbursement to build new. Is it as black and white as the numbers are the numbers and if it is more to build as new it won't be considered or is there some gray area when we're I quick math is $1.6 million if you look at the the high cost of new versus the high cost of renovate. Is there a process to go about trying to get approval to build new at the renovate cost? Uh, I think it's a possibility. Um, it's going to take some, you know, I think Collier is the one that mentioned that they had a project where that occurred. Um, and I don't know the details surrounding that project, but um, I have heard that
100it's that it's been done in the state where um, a new construction is more or less less than the renovation. So why, you know, why would you go to down the renovation path? So therefore, we're requesting the renovation um reimbursement rate. I think there's an argument to be made there. Plus, I think there's an argument to be made about the the lesser impact on the students, which I think is probably a stronger argument um or a very strong argument. So the the path for such a conversation may have to go through your your local delegation. Um I you know I I don't I don't have a lot of experience with you know how the the path for that to occur occurs. So um but I do think that there's an option that you should that
101should be explored. >> Okay. And then do you know so from an edspec perspective does that piece have to be run to the ground ahead of the application process? In other words, the lobbying for reimbursement at the renovate as new for new construction. Does that does that have to be is that part of the inspect? >> You wouldn't need to have that as part of the grant application. No. Um to to my knowledge, I think it it could be something that could happen after the fact. Um oftentimes that may be a notwithstanding request and I think that's why I was suggesting the the delegation Okay. >> And I'll say that the sooner that that lobbying can happen is is better. It doesn't have to happen before you make the grant application, but the sooner that
102conversation starts, the I think the higher the chances of of you attaining it would be. >> Okay. And one other question, and I'll probably have more later, but uh are there other sources of funding? So, for example, unless this is already baked in, things like green initiatives, uh, uh, the LED or whatever that's called, certification, uh, solar power, are there other sources that would offset some of the construction costs if we undertook other initiatives such as a green building and alter alternative power? Is that is that something that helps offset the cost? And if so, is it inconsequential or consequential? >> Uh yes, there are. Um to answer the first question, um and they can be substantial. Um when we design a project, we work with Eversource. I believe you're on Eversource, I'm not sure.
103um because they have a a new construction and andor renovation uh construction initiative energy efficient initiative program and we always try to maximize that for each of our clients. Um, it can be as, you know, it can be a a high five, excuse me, a high six figure and even a seven figure number for a re a uh rebate depending on the level of of initiatives that get incorporated into the project. Um, so yes, you can get some of that back. I, you know, I'm not an expert with with some of the um federal programs, tax rebate programs, but you know, I think there there may be some things to investigate there as well. Um, and I think the state recently adopted a statute last year that doesn't ding districts for getting money infused back
104into their project. They used to they the state used touh say well if you're getting other funding we're going to take it back um from our from our funding but I think they have changed that. I don't and again I'd have to go and research that in more detail to speak more authoritatively on that and that was actually be my follow-up question. So if we did get alternate sources of funds does it reduce um the reimbursement? That's something you have to look into. My very last question then on this topic would be if we did um get other sources of funds, does how does that affect the EDSPAC and the June 2026 um grant application? Does it is it completely irrelevant or do we other sources of funding have to be known? >> No, they
105don't have to be known. um they just need to have local funding authorization for the estimate and then you know the details can be sorted out as the project moves forward. >> All right. Thank you. Um before the um I know there are more technical questions coming but um and I appreciate all the notes here and I think I follow many of them um but can you just explain just very basically to someone who doesn't know construction um like what are you using? Is it a standardized um square footage cost? Is it materials plus labor? Is it everything you've done on school construction um experience? Are you forecasting inflation or tariffs? Um you know just kind of what are your working numbers and and how do you figure it? >> Sure. Um it they are
106based on square foot costs uh with influence from recently bid work from our firm. So we uh we analyze recently bid work uh and in this particular case I I looked back at the Greenwich Middle School project because it's virtually the same size building. Um and the the numbers are about a year old from actual bid bid numbers and then those are escalated to today. Um and then yes we do account for escalation into the future to midpoint of construction to you know to cover those increased costs. Um, so it is very schedule dependent and I think that's important for the the group to understand. You know, if this if this gets delayed from this schedule, you're going to have to add co cost to the project. Um we have worked with other districts where
107they haven't done that and then they they um have gotten to the the drawing board so to speak and the budget becomes challenged because they haven't accounted for say a year or two years worth of additional escalation because they lost that time on the schedule. Um so I I do want the group to understand that the numbers are dependent on the schedule. So, Kemp, you you talked about square footage. Do you also include things like uh portables um and uh taking down the the square footage and and buildings and and that as well? >> Yes. So, the the portables the estimate for the portables that are carried in the renovation estimate are based on a recent proposal that we received from a portable company. um for and then you know adjusted for the the quantity
108that is in this plan and then yes we we've accounted for abatement of the existing building in its entirety and then demolition of the components uh that Jim mentioned in his area plan. So I think it was about 31,000 square ft of total structural demolition. Um but we do have to abate the entire building and that those are uh estimated based on again recent bidding results. >> And and I just have one um follow-up question. Sorry Deborah. Um if we've talked about renovating to new for for um the building and the unknowns um that exist. Um maybe it can be renovated easily and maybe it can't. Um and I know that that you've projected low and high costs, but are does the high costs reflect um all the issues that could happen within renovating to
109new? >> Yes, I believe it. I believe they do. Um we've we've planned for virtually a gut renovation um for the the you know the entire portion of the building that's planned to remain as renovated. And what that means is uh even as far as taking off the exterior walls and rebuilding those because your existing building um was built in the 60s and you know the energy codes today are just so much more stringent. And so to try and adapt, you'll spend more money to try and adapt an existing wall to meet today's codes than you will to just simply take the wall down and build it again um in in accordance with today's codes. if that makes sense. So, we've accounted for that in the estimates. >> Thanks. >> Um I have a question
110about the portables. Um they are built into your renovation cost. Am I right? >> Um and um I'm just thinking, you know, as I'm sure we all are, like how can we get some of these what can we do with some of these costs? um you're assuming that in those portables basically a grade level would reside. Um, and so I I guess a question not for you necessarily, but I'm I'm trying to think how much are those portables and then um would it be worth considering um keeping those students, the sixth graders in particular, um at WHIS? And could we then back out the portable cost or are the portables beside are they used besides a grade level I guess or given the given where everybody has to move anyway you're going to you're going
111to need them anyway. >> Does that make sense? >> Yeah. No, I understand the question. I think what we've tried to account for is building capacity. Whether it's um you know whether it's a general classroom for a grade level or if it's a general classroom for half a grade level and something else is yet to be determined. You know if perhaps because of the phase of renovation that you're in, you may need to to relocate um an art room for example uh or or something like that. And so maybe one of the rooms gets adapted or two of the rooms get adapted for art for that phase and then they go back to general classrooms again in the final phase or something along those lines. Um really we were kind of just trying to provide
112capacity. So to answer the second question you had if you had capacity for swing elsewhere that could help bring the cost down. Yes. uh because you would you may not need any portables or you may need fewer portables uh because if you don't have as many students in the building to work around, we could co-opt some of the other existing space in in the uh phases, you know, in the existing building before you renovate that footprint um for those other uses. Does that make sense? >> Yeah. Yeah. No, I understand. Um and then one more question again going back to the basics um I think and again I wasn't here for all those studies but I do remember that um and I you know I'm going to go way back to the beginning of your
113presentation uh you know just talking about prior uh square footage was was less than you know what you show here and um I just want to make sure I understand it correctly that it's based on um that idea of the grossup factor. All the all the stuff besides the actual learning spaces that you need like corridors and toilets and mechanical rooms and storage spaces that you really can't count as learning spaces and that perhaps the prior estimate on square footage done, you know, in an earlier year just made that ratio just too tight. >> Yes. >> Okay. I just want to make sure that I'm kind of trying to understand it. All right. Thank you. >> Um I have I have a sort of similar question. Um thank you so much for taking the time
114to come and explain this. Clearly it's very dense. I'm still trying to digest everything, but I really appreciate your time. Um I am also wondering about the square footage. I am new to the board, so I was not here for all of the prior EDS specs and everything like that. Um, but I, you know, when I went through the middle school, it's very clear that it was, um, that the space is not efficiently utilized as you've identified, um, and that it was built for a larger student body than the 550 students that we're talking about. And so I guess I'm just it so I'm surprised to see that after all is said and done, we would be elim if you renovate as new, we would be eliminating 14,000 square ft. Um, which just doesn't seem
115like that much space to me given how much smaller the student body is and also just that both, you know, both scenarios are contemplating this 122,000 ft. And so is that because of the just because you're operating off of that prior edspec. So if we wanted to, sorry this is like a rambling question cuz I'm just trying to understand everything. If we wanted to get closer to this 1.0 eligibility factor, we would have to go and revise our EDS specs to make a smaller school. I'm I'm tr I'm struggling to understand why we can't get closer to a 1.0 eligibility factor. Do other school districts get there? Is that just is is it that the state reimbursement model and calculation is outdated and that's just a wider policy issue that schools can't get to that
116get full reimbursement rate. I'm just wondering why we're still having such a large school. >> Yeah. All good questions and and you're you're really following along because you've got a lot of it figured out. But um we are demolishing Well, yeah, you're probably right. net we're demolishing um 31,000 square feet and then we're adding back I forget the number 17. So I guess that's what the difference is 14. So yep you're tracking right along. Um the reason that districts struggle to get a 201.0 know on a middle school with a teeming model in the state of Connecticut with an enrollment in the mid500s is because of that teameming model and the and the state allowable area doesn't really um recognize the space premium that a teaming model takes. Does that make sense? So I personally
117I feel the the space standards for a middle school are a bit antiquated. um because they don't acknowledge the teaming approach that typically occurs in a meals in a middle school these days. Uh and so you're you're taking that um that enrollment number of 554 in this case. >> Yeah, I just put up the this this is one of our charts. >> Yeah, this this is a little spreadsheet that helps explain it. So, thanks Jim for this. So you can see um on the bottom the the grouping where it says 360 in the yellow cell. That's a that's just kind of like a theoretical enrollment. And if you broke that enrollment down equally across the three grades, 120 each, um you would have and and then if you look at the five classrooms per grade
118per per team, and this is a one team model per grade, uh you would fully load those classrooms at 24 students each. Uh and then you can see at the top if you duplicated that, you would have a two team model and you would still load those at 24 each. But when you're in the middle and you're at a two team model, you have a relatively well I I want don't want to call it inefficient, but you have you don't fully utilize all of those classrooms and the state allowable area doesn't account for that. That's why we're not at the 1.0 or near it. Um >> I don't know if thinking really simplistically, but wouldn't wouldn't the square footage for those classrooms be smaller? Well, you could take that approach and and that's where you
119would then reduce the net square feet in your edspec. Yes, you could take that approach, but that that will tend to um potentially uh squeeze your building a little bit too tight that some others were a little concerned about. Um so, yes, you could say um we won't load any classroom more than 20 students. Um and then you could then make the correlating adjustment to those classrooms, primary classrooms, and reduce them in size. But you just need to be careful not to go too far because then when you if you have a an enrollment bubble in the future that you're you you know you nobody can forecast you then have a building with classrooms that might be a little tight. Additionally, we do that we also would end up having >> if we don't have
120a classroom that can accommodate 24 students per teacher and we have to break out and find additional sections, then we of course have to order or order we have have to pay an additional teacher as well. So there can be additional costs with that model too. >> Yeah. And the the other considerations are teacher contracts, you know, number of students per classroom. Um, and you know, those are obviously fixed as well as the overall number of teachers. Because if you run the numbers and and you're in one of these in between things and you're not in a middle school, you can say, "Well, we don't really need 10 classrooms for this grade. We only need eight." And then you, you know, you go from your 18.5 students per classroom up to 22.7 or whatever the
121number is, but you're still under your 24. But then that's teacher positions and and in in the middle school model that doesn't really work, you know, with the the five five classroom teams or, you know, four classrooms in a science lab. Okay, I mean, this is it's really helpful. I we're going really into the nitty-gritty, but I think a lot of parents and other people in town are just really really focused on reimbursement rate and how are we maximizing and sorry, this isn't necessarily just for SLAM. I'm just brainstorming with everyone on the call tonight. Um, I think that a lot of people are just really really focused on reimbursement rate. How are we maximizing our reimbursement rate? How are we getting the most money from the state? and how are we lowering our overall
122cost? And already I think there was a lot of debate as to whether the prior numbers were reasonable to build a new middle school or not. And clearly, as we all expected, the numbers are all higher. Um, so I just think people are really going to want to know like how can we maximize this reimbursement rate? What can be done? And so I'm part of me is looking at your slide six about considerations renovate or build new. I think it might be helpful to have similar considerations of what would happen if we try to get closer to the reimbursement rate and we kind of we increase our eligibility factor. Um what are the things we have to think about? And then separately from a brainstorming point of view, and I don't know when we're going
123to talk about this, but in a prior meeting, we talked about grade configurations and having fifth grade, sixth grade, seventh grade, eighth grade, and if we did that, sixth grade wouldn't be on a teaming model. They would go back to a different model. And so, I'm just wondering how that would change square footage and classroom size and everything. And I I know that's not a conversation for today, but that's just on my mind because I think at the end of the day, um sorry, I don't know why I just called. At the end of the day, I think people I think what you hear around town is people want people care about this reimbursement rate. Um people care about overall cost and I think a lot of parents really care about disruption to their children.
124And so just going back to you know the biggest talking points um if we want buy in from the town to get this done. I think that all of what I've just mentioned is just important information to make available. >> We're here to help wherever we can. >> Yeah. And and Nicole, you you hit upon, you know, what we're where we're going to need to go in our next meeting. You absolutely are. Um I do think there are some probably some follow-up questions. I am looking at the time uh that the board may want to ask and I would suggest I mean if we could we have a time for maybe one or two more now but I really would suggest that we email them to um superintendent 40 and then she and Phil can
125just kind of organize them so they'll make sense to to slam so they don't have to go down and figure out which ones are are you know duplicated etc. And also um slam when you look at those questions you'll have to just say we can answer these we can't answer these. Um I do know uh a question that came up as as you were talking about you know the benefits and the need for doing phase two that I think it was um a couple of board members asked all right um would you also be able to say what would happen to the cost if perhaps we built um a grade five through eight middle school? So I I know that question's coming. Um and we just we need at this point just a conceptual what
126does that do in terms of percentage you know you'll you'll see the enrollment um what would that do in a very conceptual level not a detailed um estimate but we we could use that and that would dubtail with Nicole's and and if we we asked Nicole's question which would ask for much more detail would be what if we change the classroom uh square footages for some of the grade levels and that's a whole different issue and the number of classrooms it would take if we did a diad model instead of a team model. So all of those things um are for our board to discuss. But if you could give us a very high level view perhaps of adding a fifth grade there um again just just because the questions been asked and we just
127need it at a conceptual level. Um, and I think there'll be a lot of uh more financial questions that come as we sort of look at all your notes and how they impact and are included in those ranges and um where some differences uh might might occur in terms of uh total pricing. Um and then the state reimbursement issue is huge and that's something that our board will be discussing. um um I think on lots of different fronts, but we're not going to get into that tonight. Uh so um does any board member have like a last question that could just be a clarifying can you explain you know what did you mean by kind of question? >> I have a very Yeah. Um, Chem was the cost uh for the build as new, the
128cost to cart away and demolish the existing building, has that been factored in? >> Yes. Great. Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. So, um I I do want to thank um Kemp and Jim for being here tonight uh and again working on this uh report for us as quickly as you did. It means a lot. It's critical. I'm going to ask our board members to um please um this is all online. Please review the documents um any definitions etc. math all that sort of stuff. And please please do send the follow-up questions because we need to start our meeting in March. Um you know pretty comfort not comfortable exactly with prices. That's not what I'm implying, but you know, it's a solid knowledge base and then we can sort of try to figure out what
129our path forward should be. And so I'm going to ask all the board members if you could mull all this information over. Um, formulate your questions for SLAM. Perhaps you have some questions for Phil or Mike Delastro. Uh, but let's get those answered and then when we come in March, I think we need to share our perspectives. I think we need to share our recommendations um each and every one of us to the extent that we feel comfortable and that way we can see how far apart we are or how close we are uh and how we are doing with our timeline. Um I know there'll be a lot of discussions um after tonight because this is a tremendous amount of information and of course there are very um significant and uh um astounding uh
130dollar signs out there and you know we have to do our best to grapple with those while keeping our kids in mind and the condition of our middle school and the fact that we do need to move forward in some way way shape or form and it's our challenge to figure out what that is. So um again thank you for tonight um much more work to come but I do think we've have a a great foundation. I want to thank Slam for doing all the review of prior studies. I want to thank our board for being thoughtful about trying to craft some very general but important criteria as we look at our paths forward. And I want to thank the administration for looking at if it gets to it different configurations and what that might
131mean educationally. And then of course this report tonight is a huge driving factor and a critical factor. um state reimbursement is the um is the windmill that we have to go tilt at. So uh you know we we'll we'll master that in some way, shape or form as well. So any other comments for tonight. All right, I think we've all said enough and um again, thank you very much everyone for attending and listening uh and everyone's thoughtfulness and uh for Slam for your skills um and your you made a lot of difficult to understand information pretty clear in a relatively short amount of time and I think now that we have the written um proposal to go back to um I think we can fill in the gaps and the gaps that we can't fill
132in we will ask you questions about. All right, very good. Thank you for your time, everyone. >> All right, thank you. Um, that brings us to the end of our agenda and I've uh we look at our dates for our meetings. I've asked uh you know what we'll be facing when we come into March as a board. We are need we need to start grappling with all these challenges. Um, but I also want to add I think it's exciting, you know, as we plan for the future for our kids, um, and the facilities, there's also a very exciting piece to it, too. Uh, so I know that the prices, you know, challenging, but you know, what we're looking at and trying to provide kids this um, learning spaces for the future, I think is also
133there's a lot of excitement and seeing some of those plans and layouts and approaches. Um, there's a lot to think about. All right. So, is there a motion to adjurnn? So, I'll be quiet. >> I still move. >> All right. Thanks, Shar. Is there a second? >> Sorry. I apologize. I just want to clarify because on the agenda, our next meeting is in March 2nd, which happens to be Monday. So, are we still doing all of this on Mon? Are we still meeting on Monday? >> Uhu. >> And so, Slam and Okay. Nothing. I'm fine with that. Okay. >> Yeah. the the train has to move. Um, you know, we just got to move forward and, you know, just again, we we need we as a board haven't really discussed this yet on the table
134and put all all our thoughts and perspectives out there. Um, but it's time to start start doing that and no time like March and I and I think we've got the foundation, Nicole, that we need to start. So, let's throw out the questions that we have remaining for SLAM. If there are other questions we have um we'll have expertise either with slam and or collers that we can call upon. All right. Um after any more discussion about whether we should adjourn. All right. Ella Taber.