BEACH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY Presentation to Calvert - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

BEACH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY Presentation to Calvert County Board of Education February 7, 2019

FEASIBILITY STUDY Process Step 1: Information Gathering & Evaluation • Compare Existing Building Program vs. Project Goals & Ed Spec • Evaluate Existing Building Issues • Code Analysis / Review • Building Specific Diagrams • Site Plan Analysis Step 2: Concept Design • Proposed Concept Bubble Diagrams Depicting General Planning Concepts • Committee Input is Applied to Diagrams  Combinations of Preferred Features  Incorporated of New Committee Input  Development of Refined Approaches Step 3: Development of Plan Options • Concepts are refined into Formal Plan Approaches and Technically Scrutinized • Engineering Disciplines are Applied • Code Compliance • Cost Estimating • Sustainability, Energy Conservation & Life Cycle Cost Analysis • Construction Schedule, Duration, and Phasing Plan Step 4: Technical Report Preparation • Prepare Board of Education Presentation and Brochures • Prepare IAC Feasibility Study Submission

FEASIBILITY STUDY Stakeholder Advisory Group • The study is the result of it’s collaborative process • Thank you to the members of the Stakeholder Advisory Group for dedicating your time, knowledge, and efforts into this process  Dr. Michael Shisler, Principal, Beach Elementary School  Casey Grenier, Teacher, Beach Elementary School  Gwen Redden Henderson, Parent, Beach Elementary School  Mary Sterling, Parent, Beach Elementary School  Shuchita Warner LEED AP , Director of School Construction, CCPS  Darrell Barricklow AIA, LEED AP , Supervisor of School Construction, CCPS  Gregg Gott, Supervisor of Operations, CCPS  Ed Cassidy, Director of Transportation, CCPS

FEASIBILITY STUDY Program Goals • Existing Building  Area: 54,893 GSF  SRC: 514 students  9 Portables • Proposed Building  Ed Spec NSF: 50,115  Ed Spec GSF: 67,860  Ed Spec SRC: 600 Admin Instructional Media Center Special Ed Gym/ Cafe Music/ Arts Building Services

FEASIBILITY STUDY Existing Conditions Evaluation • Architectural  Smolen Emr Ilkovitch Architects • Civil  Collinson Oliff & Associates • Structural  ADTEK Engineers • Mechanical  James Posey Associates • Electrical  James Posey Associates • Plumbing  James Posey Associates • Data / IT  James Posey Associates • Life Safety  Smolen Emr Ilkovitch Architects  James Posey Associates • Cost Estimating  MK Consulting Engineers

FEASIBILITY STUDY Approach Comparison REVITALIZATION MODERNIZATION REPLACEMENT APPROACH 1 APPROACH 2 APPROACH 3A* APPROACH 3B APPROACH 3C Phased While Occupied Phased While Occupied Phased While Occupied Phased While Occupied Minimize Increase Complete Demolition Demolition Demolition Maximize Increase New All New Adaptive-Reuse Construction Construction Minimize Sitework Improve Sitework Site Redevelopment Satisfactory Good Program & Ideal Program & Adjacencies Program & Adjacencies Adjacencies *Retains 2006 Addition The purpose of a feasibility study is to determine the project approach, not to design the building

APPROACH 1: REVITALIZATION Site & Floor Plan

APPROACH 1: REVITALIZATION Phasing Plan PHASING SCHEDULE phase 0 phase 1 39 Months SY 3 SY 1 SY 2 1 2a 2b phase 2 phase 3 3 b a site site PHASING KEY existing building addition demolition renovation new building

APPROACH 1: REVITALIZATION Advantages • New addition and renovation allows for 21 st century learning environments • Front entry faces Bayside Road • Separated Bus & Student Drop-Off • Achieves Site Program • All Teaching Spaces receive Natural Light and Views • Defined Pod Structure for Each Grade

APPROACH 1: REVITALIZATION Disadvantages • Keeps most of building’s existing infrastructure • Choke point from main entry to instructional core of the building • Does not meet all ed spec adjacencies  Cafetorium to Gym  Instrumental Music to 4 th & 5 th Grades • Media, Art & Music have to traverse through the open Cafeteria • No Natural Light in Cafeteria • Gym SF remains the same • 1971 addition revitalization is costly • Admin and Public Program is distant from Instruction (long travel distance) • Gym is remote from Play Fields • Differing Floor Elevations • Nose to Tail Bus Parking • Longer Construction Duration due to Phasing

APPROACH 2: MODERNIZATION Site & Floor Plan 2 nd floor

APPROACH 2: MODERNIZATION Phasing Plan PHASING SCHEDULE phase 0 phase 1 30 Months SY 3 SY 1 SY 2 1 2 3 phase 2 phase 3 4a 4b site PHASING KEY phase 4 b existing building site a addition demolition renovation new building

APPROACH 2: MODERNIZATION Advantages • New addition and renovation allows for 21 st century learning environments • A clear front entry faces Bayside Road • Separated Bus & Student Drop-Off • Achieves Site Program with exception of Outdoor Dining 2 nd floor • Media Center is Prominent on Front of Building • All Teaching Spaces receive Natural Light and Views • 2 nd Floor allows views toward the Water • Clear separation of Public vs. Private  Secure evening use

APPROACH 2: MODERNIZATION Disadvantages • Choke point from main entry to instructional core of the building • Does not meet ed spec adjacencies for some programs  General Music to Stage  Art to Music Suite  Instrumental Music to 4 th & 5 th Grade • Gym is remote from Play Fields 2 nd floor • Outdoor Play Areas are remote from Cafeteria • Differing Floor Elevations • Media Center is not Centralized • Must cross Bus Loop from Parking Lot • Drop-off Loop creates a push condition • Longer Construction Duration due to Phasing

APPROACH 3A: REPLACE. PWO Site & Floor Plan 2 nd floor

APPROACH 3A: REPLACE. PWO Phasing Plan PHASING SCHEDULE phase 0 phase 1 30 Months SY 3 SY 1 SY 2 1 2 3 phase 2 phase 3 4 5 site PHASING KEY phase 4 phase 5 existing building addition demolition renovation new building site

APPROACH 3A: REPLACE. PWO Advantages • New addition and renovation allows for 21 st century learning environments • Separated Bus & Student Drop-Off • Achieves Site Program • When students enter they split into two directions eliminating pinch point 2 nd floor • Media Center is Centralized • All Teaching Spaces receive Natural Light and Views • Achieves all Adjacencies • Large Courtyard can serve Controlled Outdoor Learning Environments • Clear separation of Public vs. Private  Secure evening use • Ideal Building Location  Phased While Occupied Replacement

APPROACH 3A: REPLACE. PWO Disadvantages • Gym does not directly open to Play Fields • May have Differing Floor Elevations • Single loaded Corridor is Inefficient • Service is visible from Bayside Road  Will require screening • Longer Construction Duration due 2 nd floor to Phasing

APPROACH 3B: REPLACE. PWO Site & Floor Plan 2 nd floor

APPROACH 3B: REPLACE. PWO Phasing Plan PHASING SCHEDULE phase 0 phase 1 30 Months SY 3 SY 1 SY 2 1 2 3 phase 2 phase 3 4 site site PHASING KEY phase 4 existing building site addition demolition renovation new building

APPROACH 3B: REPLACE. PWO Advantages • Achieves 21 st century learning environments • Separated Bus & Student Drop-Off • Achieves Site Program • Media Center is Centralized & Prominent on face of Building 2 nd floor • All Teaching Spaces receive Natural Light and Views • Achieves all Adjacencies • Large Plaza focuses the design on Outdoor Learning Environments  The shape provides features of a courtyard without being a courtyard • All play areas are remote from street • 2 nd Floor allows views toward the Water • Clear separation of Public vs. Private with secure evening use • Gym and Cafeteria are tucked away • Portables do not have to be moved • Ideal Building Location

APPROACH 3B: REPLACE. PWO Disadvantages • Parking is Remote from Entry  Service area is visible from parking and possible secondary entrance • Longer Construction Duration due to Phasing 2 nd floor

APPROACH 3C: REPLACEMENT Site & Floor Plan 3 rd floor 2 nd floor

APPROACH 3C: REPLACEMENT Views

APPROACH 3C: REPLACEMENT Phasing Plan PHASING SCHEDULE phase 0 phase 1 27 Months SY 3 SY 1 SY 2 1 2 site phase 2 site PHASING KEY existing building addition demolition renovation new building

APPROACH 3C: REPLACEMENT Advantages • Lighthouse concept acknowledges Nautical identity of Community 3 rd floor • Fronts both roads • Achieves 21 st century learning environments  Large, Controlled Collaboration Spaces 2 nd floor • Separated Bus & Student Drop-Off  Very long Drop-off Loop  Preferred Bus Loop Stacking • Achieves Site Program • Media Center is Centralized • All Teaching Spaces receive Natural Light and Views • Achieves all Adjacencies • 2 nd & 3 rd Floors Views of Water • Clear separation of Public vs. Private with secure evening use • Ideal Building Location  Takes advantage of learning opportunities from the creek • Shorter Construction Duration

APPROACH 3C: REPLACEMENT Disadvantages • Vertical Circulation • Highest Gross Area 3 rd floor  Greatest collaboration opportunities • Parking is remote from entry 2 nd floor