The Stanley-Boyd Schools Board of Education received an update from CESA 10 on the district office relocation at its regular Board meeting Monday Jan. 27.
Still in the planning stages with no final decision, two different options were brought before the board.
The first, option 1A, would involve 10,115 square feet and cost an estimated $4 to $4.5 million.
The second, option 2A, would involve 7,800 square feet and cost an estimated $3 to $3.5 million.
Both options would be paid for with Fund 46 Capital Improvement funds, with cost estimates based on a price of $400 per square foot, with option to reduce footage and cost.
Tony Menard from CESA 10 presented on each option.
“Hi, how’s it going today?” Menard asked the board. “So where we left off last week we kind of got down to roughly two options and we wanted you guys to consider those options over this past week before we get going down a path of one these concepts into a more design phase where we hone in on scope and our next meeting comes up in February.”
The first design, option 1A, would see 10,115 square feet affected and cost an estimated $4 to $4.5 million, moving the weight room and fitness area to a triangle space off the parking lot.
“When we take a look this was where the fitness center room or weight room was kind of in this triangle here. The district office was across the way, and then we had some options up in here,” he said, gesturing towards an area on the concept drawing with remodeled building space.
Also for consideration was option 2A.
“And then the other option that was considered was the 2A option,” Menard said. “Where you have the weight room where it is and adding a fitness room and district office.”
Option 2A would include 7,800 square feet and cost an estimated $3 to $3.5 million.
“We were just retouching base and seeing where the budget’s at, because once we start adding these square footages and spaces you start getting to that $4 to 4.5 million,” Menard said of the 1A estimate. “Understanding this parking lot project and getting that updated is going to be significant too.” he said of space in front of the remodel on the school’s south end.
Menard said that maintenance also played into cost considerations.
“In our conversations today Jeff had brought up some plumbing in the existing locker room space that is always a concern and could fail in the near future that needs to be considered.”
Menard said he and fellow CESA 10 representatives Brian Antczak wanted to make sure they were helping steer things in the best way for district needs.
“Going down this, Brian and I just want to make sure we’re helping steer the ship in the path that’s best for the district, looking at the budget and what needs to happen in the future. Just want to get everybody’s thoughts on if you guys have thought about everything.” Included in the possibilities was removing parts of the remodel inside the building to hold until a later date, in the interest of controlled cost.
District Superintendent Jeff Koenig elaborated more.
“As part of our conversation today Brian, Tony, and I were talking, is I said what if we remove anything inside the building from the scope of the project,” Koenig said. “Because the existing weight room and office area and entrance to the pool, we could be fine if we never touch that. If that was just the weight room then for school purposes or we had free weights. If that’s the entrance to the pool then people would still need to go through district office security to get there. Just to remove that square footage. If we want to at a later date put a wall and divide it into a classroom and do something different we can do that but it doesn’t tie our hands on this project because it could be fine how it is now, on its own.”
Because square footage drives contractor estimates on the project cost, reducing the square footage could lead to reducing project cost estimates.
“I’m trying to reduce the square footage that they’re using for their estimates and for budgeting purposes, especially with something we don’t have to touch if you decide not to later,” Koenig said.
Lanse Carlson had a question.
“If you didn’t do anything now as far as part of this plan as far as the weight and fitness area, would we--if we want to change it at a later date--would we have to have that approved with an architect?”
“So before the meeting Brian and I went to that space again just to take a look and get our eyes on it,” Menard said. “It almost looks like this area here there’s a header that goes across and is more structural. There’s a CME wall with a bunch of windows here. So really if you wanted to look at opening the space up you’d have to take down a couple walls. We’d have to put our heads up and see what’s above the ceiling first. There’s not a lot there that we would say in our realm would need touching by an ADD (Architectural Development and Design) firm.”
“So how much do you think that would change the cost?” Carlson asked.
Menard said that while the entire area cost of $800,000 wouldn’t be saved, as other factors would affect it, a sizeable portion of the project cost could be avoided.
“I think if we could get this down more realistically around $3.3 or $3.5 million that’s going to be a lot better budget than $4.5 million,” he said referencing option 1A.
“That focus on the budget is also a focus on what the community supports too,” CESA 10 representative Brian Antczak chimed in. “Moving your offices and getting a secure entrance, where the weight room is really not supported.”
Also brought up was the question of the triangle space just inside the entrance and current community room.
“Do we have a lot of demand Jeff for our community room?” Carlson said. “That room off to the side gets used a lot. Would this triangle become that space?”
“The answer is probably yes,” Koenig said. “I think we’re wasting money if we build an open space. I think anything we add should be utilized for something. That’s just my opinion. But it’s hard to justify if we just made a big commons area. I don’t think that’s being as responsible with our resources as we could be.”
With more discussion from the board and CESA representatives Jan. 27, district residents are invited to a meeting Monday, Feb. 17 at 6 p.m. in the high school library, where district office plans will be presented at the monthly board conversation. Conceptual designs will then be finalized at the Feb. 24 regular board meeting.