View
1
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
SCHOOL FACILITIES M A S TE R P L A N & R E C O N F I G UR A T I O N S TUD Y
P R E S E N TA T I O N TO B O A R D O F E D UC A T I O N
04.23.2019
ARCHITECTS Tecton
SIMSBURY PUBLIC SCHOOLS / AG E N D A
1. INTRODUCTIONS
2. OUTLINE GOALS OF THE PROJECT
3. DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY & PROJECTIONS
4. EXISTING CONDITIONS – INITIAL FINDINGS
5. CONDITIONS SUMMARY
6. NEXT STEPS, Q & A
~11-S8u~ • P~ LS ~u'-'7'70"""''""
Tecton ARCHITECTS
INTRODUCTIONS / A C O L L AB O R AT I V E AP P R O AC H
SIMSBURY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Matthew Curtis
Burke LaClair
Steve Twitchell
Neil Sullivan
Erin Murray
Sue Homrok – Lemke
Betsy Gunsalus
Katie Wilde
Andrew O’Brien, Principal
Scott Baker, Principal
Beth Hennessy, Principal
Mike Luzietti, Principal
Meg Evans, Principal
Steve Matyczyk, Principal
Maggie Seidel, Principal
Superintendent of Schools
School Business Manager
Supervisor of Buildings and Grounds
Director of Personnel
Assistant Superintendent for Teaching & Learning
Assistant Superintendent of Pupil Services
Director of Elementary Curriculum & Student Assessments
Executive Assistant
Simsbury High School
Henry James Memorial School
Central School
Latimer Lane School
Squadron Line School
Tariffville School
Tootin’ Hills School
~11-S8u~ • P~ LS ~u'-'7'70"""''""
Tecton ARCHITECTS
INTRODUCTIONS / A C O L L AB O R AT I V E AP P R O AC H
CONSULTANT TEAM
TECTON ARCHITECTS Architecture & Programming
Jeff Wyszynski, AIA Ed Widofsky, AIA Stephen Melingonis, AIA Alison Fredericks, Assoc. AIA
MILONE & MACBROOM SZEWCZAK ASSOCIATES Demographic Projections Structural Engineering Patrick Gallagher, AICP Peter Celella, PE
CES FUSS & O’NEILL – CIVIL ENGINEERING
MEP Engineering Site, Civil, Landscape, Planning
Derek Bride, PE Ron Bomengen, PE, LEED AP, Associate
ARCHITECTS Tecton
GOALS OF THE PROJECT/ M AS T E R P L AN F O R T H E F U T U R E
• Analysis of Existing Conditions & Educational Needs
• Identify capital Improvements & Maintenance
requirements
• 10 year prioritized plan, sustainable approach to address
facility and educational needs
• Review Demographics
• Develop Alternative Configurations for the district
• Engage community & explore responsive solutions
• Long Range Master Plan for community
ARCHITECTS Tecton
COMMUNICATION/ K E E P I N G T H E L I N E S O P E N
• District Leadership Meetings
• Meeting Dates: 3rd Wednesday each month, 11 a.m., BOE offices.
• BOE Progress Presentation
• April 23, 2019 @ 7 p.m.
• Facilities & Enrollment Task Force Meeting
• Demographics & Existing Conditions Review
• Tentative Date scheduled for mid-May
• Public Forum & Workshop
• Demographics & Existing Conditions Review
• Tentative Date scheduled for June 5th @ 7pm
DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS SUMMARY PRESENTATION
L - ,L-
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
~ :
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
SCHOOL PLANNING EXPERIENCE
IN CONNECTICUT
About MMI
▪ Interdisciplinary firm of planners,
demographers, engineers, scientists
and landscape architects
headquartered in Cheshire, CT.
▪ More than 20 Facility Studies over
the last 5 years for school systems
ranging from 800 – 21,000
Students.
▪ Enrollment Projections
▪ Facility Master Plans
▪ Redistricting and
Reconfiguration Plans
Births from 1996 to 2018 350
300 287 285 282
250
200
150
100
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Demographics Takeaways
The Town has experienced modest population growth in recent years, growing by 3.4% between 2010 and 2017.
• Population growth is highest in the Route 10/202 corridor and is has been driven by recent housing construction.
• DOT Projections show continued modest population growth for the foreseeable future.
The Town’s population is aging
• Median age increased from 41.7
years old in 2010 to 44.7 years old
in 2017.
Births have increased in recent
years.
• Birth cohorts corresponding with
the next four kindergarten classes
are larger than the last five years – range from 180 to 195.
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Housing Takeaways
▪ Significant multi-family construction in recent years. An additional 484 units are in the pipeline for developments currently approved and under construction.
▪ Multi-family construction is concentrated in the Latimer, Central, and Squadron Line District.
▪ Recent multi-family construction has, on average, produced 0.14 students per unit.
▪ Single-family construction has yet to rebound from the Recession.
▪ Rental housing tends to produce a more transient student population compared to owner-occupied homes. The highest concentrations of rental housing are in Tariffville and Weatogue.
▪ Home sales have recovered since 2011, but have yet to return to pre-recession levels.
■ ■ ■ ■
■ ■ ■
■
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
300 250
Housing Permits
Simsbury Housing Permits, by Type: 1997-2018 YTD
250
200
150
100
50
0
59 73 68
34 26 36
71
24
85 60
19 10 3 14 18
99 99
176
93
64
Single-Family Multi-Family Total
Source: Connecticut DECD, Annual Housing Permits
2018 YTD is from Jan to Aug
▪ According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS), the number of housing units in Simsbury increased by 7.8% between 2010 and 2017.
▪ Average of 150 new housing units per year over the last five years, driven by multi-family construction.
▪ Single-family construction has yet to rebound from the Recession.
▪ 2018 YTD housing permits were the second highest, with 189 housing permits, and several months of data yet to be included.
189
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Recent and Planned Housing
Name Type School District
Proposed
Units Built Units
Occupied
Units Status
Mill Commons Apartments Central 88 88 80 Complete
Mill Pond Crossing Townhouses Central 20 20 18 Complete
Dorset Crossing Apartments Squadron Line 168 168 148 Complete
Kings Ridge Apartments Latimer 24 24 21 Complete
The Ridge at Talcott Mountain Apartments Latimer 282 0 0 Under Construction
Aspen Green Apartments Latimer 181 151 141 Under Construction
Cambridge Crossing Single-Family Squadron Line 79 7 0 Under Construction
Highcroft Place Apartments Central 252 200 158 Under Construction
Mansion at Chestnut Hill Apartments Central 5 0 0 Under Construction
Carson Way Single Family Central 74 31 28 Under Construction
Meadow Wood Development Single-Family Squadron Line 296 0 0 Approved
32 Iron Horse Boulevard Apartments Central 135 0 0 Planned
Total All Developments 1,604 689 594
Data provided by the Town of Simsbury Planning Department and Simsbury Public Schools
• In recent years, 689 new units have been built – mostly multi-family apartments. An additional 484 units are in the pipeline for developments currently approved and under construction.
• Phased construction of these units is likely to occur over a multi-year period.
• Meadow Wood Development was approved in 2007 and has yet to move forward to construction.
• 32 Iron Horse Boulevard project is not yet approved.
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Student Generation from Housing
Recent Developments
Name Occupied Units
Total
Enrollment
(10/1/2018)
Enrollment per
Occupied Unit Status
Mill Commons 80 9 0.11 Complete
Mill Pond Crossing 18 5 0.28 Complete
Dorset Crossing 148 23 0.16 Complete
Kings Ridge 21 3 0.14 Complete
Aspen Green 141 26 0.18 Under Construction
Highcroft Place 158 14 0.09 Under Construction
Carson Way 28 5 0.18 Under Construction
Total All Developments 594 85 0.14
• Currently just under 600 occupied units producing 85 SPS students as of 2018, or 0.14 students per unit.
• Up to 50% of students who move into these developments are existing SPS students.
▪ A higher number of units does not directly translate to a higher enrollment of students. Price points, unit size and type also factor into average enrollment.
▪ Single-family housing yields more students per unit than multi-family housing.
▪ Multiple bedrooms and cheaper price points for multi-family homes generally yield more students per unit. Higher end multi-family units typically produce few students.
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Enrollment Trends
CJ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • □
•
■ •
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Enrollment Trends: District
District Enrollment Trends from 2001 to 2019
6,000 4,958 4,973 4,995 5,018 5,014 4,957 4,917 4,908 4,838 4,731 4,647 4,501 4,330 4,254 4,133 4,110 4,039 4,018
2,706 2,732 2,727 2,710 2,698 2,612 2,562 2,507 2,435 2,348 2,235 2,188 2,075 2,048 1,983 1,976 1,976 1,989
824 778 804 850 805 790 816 838 827 805 792 748 727 739 710 690 658 610
1,428 1,463 1,464 1,458 1,511 1,555 1,539 1,563 1,576 1,578 1,620 1,565 1,528 1,467 1,440 1,444 1,405 1,419
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
K-6 7-8 9-12 Total
Data provided by Simsbury Public Schools
• Most recent enrollment peak was 5,018 students in 2005-06.
• Elementary school enrollments peaked in 2002-03 at 2,732 students and declined by 27.2% since then – however, enrollments have leveled off over the last four years.
• Middle school enrollments peaked in 2004-05 at 850 students and have steadily declined by 28.2% since then. 2018-19 middle school enrollment is lowest in recent memory.
• High school enrollment peaked at 1,620 students in 2011-12 and have declined by 12.4% .
• Enrollment of Simsbury residents in private, parochial, or magnet schools has been relatively stable over the last few years.
Enrollment Trends: Elementary
Elementary School Enrollment: 2012-13 to 2018-19
379 378
444 408
659
582
286
420
373300
400
500
600
700
□----------------------□ T T
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
248200
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
Central Latimer Squadron Line Tariffville Tootin Hills
▪ Every elementary school experienced a decline in enrollment between 2012-13
and 2018-19, although the rate of decline varied.
▪ Central School experienced the smallest decline at just -0.3%.
▪ Tariffville (-13.3%), Squadron Line (-11.7%), and Tootin’ Hills (-11.2%) experienced the
largest declines.
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Enrollment Projections
- - -
-
-
DODD
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Projections Building Blocks
Starting Data
Critical to the overall accuracy of the
projections, as each year builds upon the last.
District Projections
Town of
Simsbury Births
Historic
Enrollment
Trends
Obtained from CT Obtained from SPS
DPH and CT SDE
Geolocated
Enrollment
Data
Geolocated
Birth Data
Individual School Projections
Obtained from CT DPH Obtained from SPS
and address matched and address
matched
Projection Assumptions
Several projection models are developed by applying
different persistency ratios to building blocks
5 Year 3 Year 3 Year Average Average Weighted Blended
Demographic and Housing Data
Used to inform model selection
Unemployment
(Town, Region)
Home Sales
(1 family,
condos)
Women of
Child Bearing
Age + Fertility
Rates
Housing Permit
Activity
& Multipliers
Population
Projections &
Development
Capacity
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Projections Primer
Cohort Survival Method
▪ Based on Cohort Survival Methodology ‐ Standard method for enrollment projections.
▪ Methodology accepted by CSDE School Construction Projects (CGS 10‐283).
▪ The Cohort Survival Methodology relies on observed data from the recent past in order to predict the near future.
▪ Methodology works well for stable populations, including communities that are growing or declining at a steady rate.
▪ Student generation from approved housing developments are added to the base enrollment projections.
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Projections Primer
Persistency Ratios
▪ Persistency ratios are calculated from historic enrollment data to determine growth or loss in a class as it progresses through school system.
▪ Persistency ratios account for the various external factors affecting enrollments, including housing characteristics, residential development, economic conditions, student transfers in and out of the system, and student mobility.
▪ Housing construction is accounted for in the persistency ratios.
▪ Persistency Ratio of 1.0 means cohort size remains the same; 1.05 means the cohort size increases by 5%, or a cohort of 100 grows to 105 the following year.
▪ Changes in population, housing stock and tenure, and economic conditions help explain persistency ratios.
▪ Full-day kindergarten began in 2012-13. Years prior to 2012-13 were not used for B-K and K-1 persistencies.
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Persistency Ratios
Year Birth-K K-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9-10 10-11 11-12
Est of
Migration (1-7
to 2-8)
Elem
Migration (K-5
to 1-6)
2002-03 1.232 1.118 1.003 1.016 1.025 1.029 0.995 0.972 0.982 0.936 0.969 0.973 0.979 0.29% 2.98%
2003-04 1.352 1.137 0.929 1.020 1.037 1.019 0.981 1.000 1.011 0.950 0.988 0.974 0.962 -0.14% 1.72%
2004-05 1.177 1.161 0.972 1.042 1.027 1.061 0.984 1.041 1.002 1.003 0.983 0.953 0.976 1.87% 3.89%
2005-06 1.294 1.099 0.987 1.015 1.018 1.002 0.995 1.011 1.002 0.962 0.990 0.983 1.000 0.43% 1.71%
2006-07 1.213 1.095 0.997 1.008 0.977 1.023 0.988 1.000 1.011 0.986 0.988 0.984 1.009 0.04% 1.18%
2007-08 1.317 1.149 1.026 1.038 0.972 1.016 1.024 0.993 0.993 0.968 0.981 0.990 1.011 0.81% 3.32%
2008-09 1.155 1.168 1.014 1.028 1.040 1.021 1.005 1.019 1.017 0.983 0.972 0.995 1.015 2.05% 4.15%
2009-10 1.251 1.160 1.006 1.014 0.981 0.990 1.026 1.010 1.009 0.981 1.020 1.011 1.012 0.53% 2.36%
2010-11 1.235 1.141 1.038 1.018 1.031 1.017 1.003 1.000 1.015 0.951 1.000 0.995 1.045 1.64% 3.64%
2011-12 1.178 1.079 1.016 1.009 1.040 1.035 0.992 0.997 1.010 0.998 0.978 1.000 1.034 1.39% 2.60%
2012-13 1.276 1.173 1.057 1.019 1.033 1.017 0.976 1.000 0.992 0.909 0.973 1.000 0.998 1.08% 3.63%
2013-14 1.392 1.127 1.008 1.025 1.031 0.980 0.959 0.997 0.983 0.995 0.986 0.974 0.995 -0.43% 1.54%
2014-15 1.266 1.056 1.058 1.086 1.021 1.012 1.006 1.006 1.035 0.952 0.979 0.986 1.031 2.98% 3.72%
2015-16 1.347 1.061 1.045 1.017 1.045 1.017 1.000 1.012 1.031 0.948 0.985 0.971 1.050 2.29% 2.93%
2016-17 1.489 1.076 0.996 1.086 1.064 1.000 1.020 1.042 1.000 0.975 0.997 1.006 1.063 2.85% 3.82%
2017-18 1.573 1.061 1.000 1.069 1.004 1.028 0.990 1.010 1.026 0.951 1.022 0.989 1.054 1.84% 2.51%
2018-19 1.605 1.097 1.043 1.029 0.993 1.040 0.972 1.013 1.013 0.966 1.024 0.997 1.050 1.34% 2.62%
Kindergarten through 12th Grade Persistency Ratios by School Year: 2002-2003 to 2018-19
▪ Generally, classes grow slowly as they matriculate through the system (PRs slightly higher than 1.0).
▪ Estimate of migration tracks changes in grades 1-7 one year compared to grades 2-8 the following year – Stable in-migration over
the last few years ranging from 1.3% to 3%.
▪ Elementary migration is higher, with an average of about 3% over the last five years.
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Birth-K Persistency Ratios
Birth and Kindergarten Trends
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
363 351 342 332
Half Day Kindergarten
317
Full Day Kindergarten
302 291
275 269 268 242
225 245
262 262
231 225
258
287 285
253
282
245 249 238
221 215 196 192
207 191
176166 167 164 167
Births (5-Years Prior) Kindergarten Enrollment
▪ Since full-day kindergarten began in 2012-13, Birth-K persistency ratios have
averaged 1.42 – or 142 kindergarteners for every 100 births 5-years prior.
▪ As the number of births has declined, the Birth-K persistency ratio has risen – indicates
a larger share of Kindergarteners moved to town before enrolling in kindergarten.
▪ Birth-K persistency rose to 1.61 in 2018-19.
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
------- -~. -- --'41::-----------------
Birth Projections
Simsbury Actual and Projected Births: 2008 to 2023
179
204
225
166
207
167
176 164 167
181 195
184 190
206
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
est proj. proj. proj. proj. proj.
Birth Projections Model Assumptions
▪ Three birth projections models
developed for the three enrollment
projection models – align with final five
years of kindergarten projections.
▪ Medium model assumes births
remain at similar levels as last five
years averaging ~185 to 204 per
Variable
Low
Projections
Medium
Projections
High
Projections
County Unemployment 4.8% to 5% 4.4% to 4.7% 4% to 4.7%
Single-Family Home
Sales 320 to 353 363 to 385 370 to 425
Single-Family + Condo
Sales 410 to 461 473 to 485 480 to 525
Projected Births 179 to 180 185 to 204 190 to 225
year.
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Districtwide Projections
Simsbury Public Schools Actual and Projected K-12 Enrollment:
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
4,502
3,9903,9643,9643,9584,0174,0584,083 4,1384,185
to
4,018 4,1334,1104,039 4,286
4,013
4,8384,7314,647
4,501 4,3304,254
2001-02 2028-29Historic Projected
High Medium Low Historic
Medium projections model most closely aligns with underlying demographic, housing, and economic trends
▪ Medium model is best supported by underlying demographic, housing, and
economic data – assumes continuation of recent conditions.
▪ Districtwide enrollment is projected to drop slightly over the next four school to a low
of 3,958 in 2022-23.
▪ After 2022-23, enrollment is projected to increase by about 8%, reaching 4,286 by
2028-29.
D D D
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Districtwide Projections (Medium)
Enrollment Projections, by Grade: 2018-19 to 2018-29
School YearBirth
YearBirths K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 PK K-6 Total 7-8 Total 9-12 Total K-12 Total
PK-12
Total
2018-19 2013 167 268 283 290 249 294 289 316 303 307 343 335 364 377 101 1,989 610 1,419 4,018 4,119
2019-20 2014 181 272 289 287 308 254 301 287 323 307 296 348 334 384 101 1,998 630 1,362 3,990 4,091
2020-21 2015 195 284 293 293 305 314 260 299 293 327 296 300 347 353 101 2,048 620 1,296 3,964 4,065
2021-22 2016 184 277 306 297 311 311 321 258 306 297 315 300 299 366 101 2,081 603 1,280 3,964 4,065
2022-23 2017 190 286 299 310 315 317 318 319 264 310 286 319 299 316 101 2,164 574 1,220 3,958 4,059
2023-24 2018 206 300 308 303 329 321 324 316 326 267 299 290 318 316 101 2,201 593 1,223 4,017 4,118
2024-25 2019 185 278 323 312 321 336 328 322 323 330 257 303 289 336 101 2,220 653 1,185 4,058 4,159
2025-26 2020 190 286 300 327 331 327 344 326 329 327 318 261 302 305 101 2,241 656 1,186 4,083 4,184
2026-27 2021 194 282 308 304 347 338 335 342 333 333 315 322 260 319 101 2,256 666 1,216 4,138 4,239
2027-28 2022 199 290 304 312 323 354 346 333 350 337 321 319 321 275 101 2,262 687 1,236 4,185 4,286
2028-29 2023 204 297 313 308 331 329 362 344 340 355 325 325 318 339 101 2,284 695 1,307 4,286 4,387
Source: MMI Projections based on a 5-year persistency ratios for BK and 3-year persistency ratios for K-1 through 11-12
Assumes stable Pre-K enrollment of 101 students and stable Open Choice enrollment
Years projected based on preliminary birth data
Years projected based on partial year birth data
Years projected based on projected birth data
---------· --------~- ........... _.,._ .. -1►-------
j
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Elementary Projections (Medium)
Simsbury Public Schools Actual and Projected K-6 Enrollment: 2001-02 to
3,000
2,750
2,500
2,250
2,000
1,750
1,500
2028Historic -29 Projected
2,435 2,348
2,2352,188
2,2562,2622,284
2,1642,2012,2202,241 2,0752,048
1,9831,9761,9761,989 2,0482,081 1,998
Medium Medium projections model
▪ Elementary enrollments have already bottomed out.
▪ Projections show steady increase in elementary enrollment over the next five
years as larger birth cohorts enter kindergarten.
▪ A more modest increase is projected for the last five years of the projections horizon.
Elementary Projections (Medium)
Elementary School Projections (K-6): 2018-19 to
2028-29
582
683
600
700
500 495408
378 436
248 255
373
415
200
300
400
CL----------------□
C2Ji-----------D r r r
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29
Central Latimer Squadron Line Tariffville Tootin' Hills
Medium projections model
▪ Fastest growth projected at Latimer (21.3%), Squadron Line (17.4%) and Central
(15.3%), the three districts with the greatest housing construction activity.
▪ Modest growth projected at Tootin’ Hills over the first five years of the projections.
▪ Tariffville projected to stay generally stable over the next decade, growing by just 2.8%.
------------ , -- --- , ---.._. _, --
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
Middle School Projections (Medium)
Simsbury Public Schools Actual and Projected 7-8 Enrollment: 2001-02 to
900
850
800
750
700
650
600
550
500
630 620 603
574 593
653 656 666
687 695
827 805 792
748 727 739
710 690
658
610
2028-29 Historic Projected
Medium Historic Medium projections model
▪ Middle School enrollment projected to decline by 5.9% over the next four years,
reaching 574 students by 2022-23.
▪ Beginning in 2023-24, Middle School enrollment begins to rebound, reaching 695
students by 2028-29.
........ ........ --.... ,, ,____ ---------
~!~ MILONE & MACBROOM
High School Projections (Medium)
Simsbury Public Schools Actual and Projected 9-12 Enrollment: 2001-
1,800
1,700
1,600
1,500
1,400
1,300
1,200
1,100
1,000
1,3621,2961,280
1,2201,223
1,1851,186 1,2161,236
1,307
1,5761,578 1,620
1,5651,528
1,4671,4401,4441,4051,419
02 to 2028-29 Historic Projected
Medium Historic Medium projections model
▪ High school enrollments projected to decline by 16% over the next 7 years.
▪ Rebound in high school enrollments to begin in 2026-27 as larger middle school
classes begin moving up to 9th grade.
EXISTING CONDITIONS INITIAL FINDINGS
ARCHITECTS Tecton
CURRENT STATUS/ WO R K C O M P L E T E D S O F AR
• Collection of existing conditions
• Collected & scanned drawings, reports, utilities bills, etc.
• Walkthroughs of facilities January, March, April
• Analysis of physical deficiencies
• Proposed recommendations to remediate
deficiencies
• Programmatic Discussions
• Stakeholder interviews & walkthrough of facilities ~ March & April
• Assessment of physical environment impacting education
• Develop current and future needs
–
EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT • Alignment with core beliefs
• Strategic goals and vision for curriculum
• Interviews & Assessment
• Physical constraints that affect education
• What works well now?
• What doesn’t work?
• Goals and vision
• Average Class Size
• Site Logistics concerns, challenges, etc.
• Trends in Education that are missing
• Biggest Areas of concern
• Existing space vs. new space
• Priorities
ARCH I TECTS
SIMSBURY SCHOOLS / F AC I L I T I E S O V E R V I E W
BUILDING YEAR BUILT CURRENT
AGE
CUR.
ENROLL.
GRADE
CONFIG. (E) SF AREA
TARIFFVILLE 1925, 1959,
1986, 2009
94, 60, 33,
10 246 K-6 39,398
TOOTIN’ HILLS 1954, 1958,
1995, 2000
65, 61, 24,
19 370 K-6 57,184
SQUADRON LINE 1969 50 578 PK-6 91,361
LATIMER LANE 1962, 1996 57, 23 405 K-6 39,398
CENTRAL SCHOOL 1913, 1950,
1997 106, 69, 22 375 K-6 60,909
HENRY JAMES
MEMORIAL
1957, 1959,
2000, 2019 62, 60, 19 610 7-8 146,020
SIMSBURY HIGH
SCHOOL
1968, 1982,
2005 51, 37, 14 1419 9-12 303,541
N OT E S : (1 ) YE A R BU I LT ~ C OMPLE T ION D A T E
(2 ) S F A R E A I S BA SE D U PON A SSE SSOR IN FOR MA T ION A N D E X I S T IN G C ON D I T ION S D OC U ME N T S PR OVID E D
ARCHITECTS Tecton
FORMAT/ E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S
On site walkthrough, general observations and analysis of conditions
1. Site – overall layout, accessibility, code, useful life condition, safety/security,
parking, sidewalks, lighting, drainage, utilities, and fields
2. Structure – type, code, useful life, condition, identification of specific concerns
3. Architecture – code, accessibility, life safety, useful life, condition, safety/security
a) Exterior - roofs, walls, soffits, windows, doors, and features of the building
b) Interior – finishes (doors, walls, ceilings, millwork, fixtures, lighting)
4. Building Systems Survey – code, life safety, useful life of equipment, comfort &
control
a. Plumbing
b. Mechanical
c. Electrical
d. Fire Protection & Alarms
e. Safety / Security
ARCH I TECTS
FORMAT/ E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S
Identification & Prioritization (Scale 1 to 5) A ranking for each item was given from 1-5 to indicate the priority of attention required. A ranking of 1 indicates a material requiring prompt attention, while a ranking of 5 indicates the material is in good condition and does not require maintenance or replacement. Accessibility compliance is identified as (A)
2 1
A
EXISTING CONDITIONS INVENTORY & ANALYSIS
TARIFFVILLE SCHOOL (TSJ •·•
8. SUMMARY&. ANALYSIS
8.1 School & Foclllty Doto
The School:
Type-·
Er.-oHmenl(2011)
s1aff(appro1t):
Elementa 2'8
70
!r.-allmen1(10yrproje,,;:tlon): ~'='°~-N11t11,v0Hm11ntehong• · • 12
loeallon{lnlown): norttleost end
The Faclll
TotolBulldingAtHi{Sf): 39.398Sf
Sll• N•o {ac:re1); 4.41 acres Sloriei(gbovegrc,de-);
luNdlng / Framing Moter1cil1· moron . steel
concrete.woo
Split-lev.l / ramp1flnl•lorl ~="°='~ Slalrs (inl• lo1):
lo;"• menl;
Menanlne(IN'ehanlcal)
CrawlSpoee / l\!nnel1:
Modulars (clauraam1):
Audlofy&ulldlng1;
fuNADACampMance
ves. 2.56ASF
es. storo e
ba.eboll bad :
EXISTING CONDITIONS INVENTORY & ANALYSIS
TARIFFVILLE SCHOOL (TS) K •
11 . SUMMARY I ANAi YS!S EXISTING CONDITIONS INVENTORY & ANALYSIS
B.3 Conditions Rankings TARIFFVILLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (TS) K •
B.33 CHECKLIST & RANKINGS D. f.l::!.QIQ..lQQ
Ranking· 1 Vef'f Poor [VP) Require'> prom 0 .2 SHe 2 J>oor[P] Moymquire o tlentio 3 Fo,r JFI Moyfl!tqul re c f!ention 4 Good [GI MOVleQv~e ollenti s VefYGood (VGJ Doe1 no t re
Exterior
~oollng
Walkways / lite stairs
l andscaping
EPDM membrone PVCmembrone FJogilr.g / jolnl! Aluminum guitars/ Fo~io trim Masonry - Brick Clad ding , vinyl Trim Joinh (B<Adingor e Wollrnovn t1:1d lil<l u
Av i<i liofy BViloing[1J t oa ding areo Dvmpst1:1r Endosur Silc l ghtlng lflxlvlc C0 IChl:>osin !OQS Cotchbminstrvc!
EXISTING CONDITIONS INVENTORY & ANALYSIS
TARIFFVILLE SCHOOL 11sJ • •
FORMAT/ E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S
Summary Analysis, Ranking, Photos, Diagrams
BUILDING
TARIFFVILLE
n:ur:::n w · • ma • ·~•-llfflfflllll§Hh+E 1925, 1959. 1986, 2009
94, 60, 33, 10
246 K-6 39,398
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ T AR I F F V I L L E E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
Site Review and Analysis
1. Access Drives
2. Roadways/Parking
3. Pedestrian Walks
4. Loading/Receiving
5. Grass & Paved Play
6. Playgrounds
7. Storm Drainage
8. Perimeter / Fencing
9. Lighting
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ T AR I F F V I L L E E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
Parking Capacity
Dumpster Access
Drainage @ Play
Perimeter Fencing
Access/Parking
Wildlife @ modulars
1
2
3
4
5
6 1
2
3
4
5
6
5
Key Site Items
BUILDING
TARIFFVILLE
n:ur:::n w · • ma • ·~•-llfflfflllll§Hh+E 1925, 1959. 1986, 2009
94, 60, 33, 10
246 K-6 39,398
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
BUILDING
TARIFFVILLE 1925, 1959, 1986, 2009
94, 60, 33, 10
246
,.
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
K-6 39,398
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ T AR I F F V I L L E E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
~11-SSu~
ii i~ s.: ~ P~ LS. ~~~·r,10~ ··~
BUILDING Tecton TARIFFVILLE
1925, 1959, 94, 60, 33, 246 1986, 2009 10 K-6 39,398
ARCH I TECTS
S C H O O L
Structure
• Original – wood joist
construction, bearing wall
• Additions – steel framed,
tectum deck
• Exterior steel canopy in need
of repairs/replacement
Architecture
• Not ADA compliant
• No access to 2nd floor
• Antiquated and inefficient
storage in classrooms
• Access to modulars through
Gymnatorium
• Roof and roof drainage
improvements required
• Original construction requires
envelop repairs – repointing
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ T AR I F F V I L L E E L E M E N T AR Y
~11-SSu~
ii i~ s.: ~ P~ LS. ~~~·r,10~ ··~
BUILDING
TARIFFVILLE
n:ur:::n w · • ma • ·~•-llfflfflllll§Hh+E 1925, 1959. 1986, 2009
94, 60, 33, 10
246 K-6 39,398
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ T AR I F F V I L L E E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
Mechanical
• New Heating Plant 2009
• New and Old Systems
• Limited Air Conditioning
Electrical
• New Electrical Service 2009
• New Generator 2011
• New and Old Distribution
Systems
Fire Protection & Alarm
• Full Sprinkler System 2009
• Full Fire Alarm System 2009
• Safety/Security
• Full Perimeter Cameras
• Entry Station at Main Door
-
TARIFFVILLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
1. ADA accessibility (second floor classrooms)
2. Upgrade toilet facilities
3. Envelope Repairs & Gym canopy removal
4. Replace modular or remove wildlife
5. Address drainage issues in the grass field and playground areas
6. Address parking, provide access control, and remove spaces directly adjacent to building
7. Mechanical upgrades to unit vents and provide AC
8. Programming Add flexible intervention, specialized
educational space, efficient storage, and replace modular with permanent construction
BUILDING YEAR BUILT CURRENT CUR. GRADE
AGE ENROLL. CONFIG. (E) SF AREA Tecton
TOOTIN ' HILLS 1954, 1958, 65, 61 , 24, 1995, 2000 19
ARCH I TECTS 370 K-6 57,184
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ T O O T I N H I L L S E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
Site Review and Analysis
1. Access Drives
2. Roadways/Parking
3. Pedestrian Walks
4. Loading/Receiving
5. Grass & Paved Play
6. Playgrounds
7. Storm Drainage
8. Perimeter / Fencing
9. Lighting
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ T O O T I N H I L L S E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
Stair Improvements
Catch Basins
Drainage at play
Perimeter fencing
Curbing
Access Control to site
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
6
Key Site Items
BUILDING YEAR BUILT CURRENT CUR. GRADE
AGE ENROLL. CONFIG.
TOOTIN ' HILLS 1954, 1958, 65, 61 , 24, 370 1995, 2000 19 K-6
(E) SF AREA
57,184
a
a a a a
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
TOOTIN ' HILLS 1954, 1958, 65, 61 , 24, 370 1995, 2000 19 K-6 57,184
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ T O O T I N H I L L S E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
BUILDING Tecton TOOTIN ' HILLS 1954, 1958, 65, 61 , 24, 370
1995, 2000 19
ARCH ITECTS K-6 57,184
S C H O O L EXISTING CONDITIONS/ T O O T I N H I L L S E L E M E N T AR Y
Structure
• Original - Steel frame with
tectum style decking
• Additions – Steel frame with
metal decking
• Basement foundation walls
sound however water
penetration an issue
Architecture
• Relatively minor ADA
compliance issues at stage
and classrooms
• Building envelope in need of
renovation – replace single
pane windows, caulk joints,
flashings, entrance doors
• Inefficient and antiquated
classroom storage in areas
• Gymnatorium in need of
renovation, flooring in
particular
• Building circulation a
challenge, some cases go
outside to reduce travel
BUILDING Z1Pil'i'!l1■3 · • • I ••••·• -··iiF+M Tecton TOOTIN ' HILLS 1954, 1958, 65, 61 , 24, 370
1995, 2000 19
ARCH ITECTS K-6 57,184
S C H O O L EXISTING CONDITIONS/ T O O T I N H I L L S E L E M E N T AR Y
Mechanical
• New Heating Plant 2016
• New and Old Systems
• Old Steam Distribution
• Limited Air Conditioning
Electrical
• New Electrical Service 2000
• New Generator 2000
• New and Old Distribution
Systems
Fire Protection & Alarm
• Full Sprinkler System 2000
• New Fire Pump 2000
• Full Fire Alarm System 2000
Safety/Security
• Full Perimeter Cameras
• Entry Station at Main Door
-
TOOTIN’ HILLS ELEMENTARY
1. ADA accessibility
2. Upgrade toilet facilities
3. Replace single pane windows
4. Repair/review pitch of sanitary line in 2000 Addition
5. Address drainage issues in the grass field and playground areas
6. Address parking and provide access control
7. Add ventilation to 1954 portion of building
8. Programming Add flexible intervention, specialized educational space, efficient storage
BUILDING M•i·lil'i1iiiEUlrllBMbifi-i·ii·M Tecton ARCH ITECTS
SQUADRON LINE 1969 50 578 PK-6 91 .361
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ S Q U AD R O N L I N E E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
Site Review and Analysis
1. Access Drives
2. Roadways/Parking
3. Pedestrian Walks
4. Loading/Receiving
5. Grass & Paved Play
6. Playgrounds
7. Storm Drainage
8. Perimeter / Fencing
9. Lighting
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ S Q U AD R O N L I N E E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
Bus/Parent Flow
Dumpster/Access
Outdoor storage
Remote play
Fencing
Drainage
Access Control
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
Key Site Items
77
BUILDING M•i·lil'i1iiiEUlrllBMbifi-i·ii·M SQUADRON LINE 1969 50 578 PK-6 91 .361
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tecton ARCH ITECTS
BUILDING Tecton ARCH I TECTS
SQUADRON LINE 1969 50 578 PK-6 91 ,361
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ S Q U AD R O N L I N E E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
BUILDING YEAR BUILT
SQUADRON LINE 1969
CURRENT AGE
50
CUR. GRADE ENROLL. CONFIG.
(E) SF AREA Tecton ARCH I TECTS
578 PK-6 91 .361
E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L EXISTING CONDITIONS/ S Q U AD R O N L I N E
Structure
• Original - Steel frame with
steel joist framing, gypsum
deck roof, metal
deck/concrete floor slabs
Architecture
• Not ADA compliant, ramp
does not meet code, no
easy fix
• Building envelope in need of
renovation – replace areas
with single pane windows,
roof approaching 20 years
• Original folding partitions
between classrooms
consistent challenge
• Lack of natural daylight in
corridors, low artificial lighting
levels
• Gymnatorium in need of
renovation, flooring in
particular
• Ramp connector often
congested with students to
and from core areas
BUILDING M•i·lil'i1iiiEUlrllBMbifi-i·ii·M Tecton ARCH ITECTS
SQUADRON LINE 1969 50 578 PK-6 91 .361
E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L EXISTING CONDITIONS/ S Q U AD R O N L I N E
Mechanical
• New Heating Plant 2015
• Original Distribution
Systems
• Exhausted Building, Old
Design
• Limited Air Conditioning
Electrical
• Original Electrical Service
1969
• New Generator 2012
• Old Distribution Systems
Fire Protection & Alarm
• No Sprinkler System
• Limited Heads From
Domestic Water
• New Full Fire Alarm System
2017
Safety/Security
• Full Perimeter Cameras
• Entry Station at Main Door
–
-
SQUADRON LINE ELEMENTARY
1. Replace folding partitions between educational spaces,
provide adequate storage
2. ADA accessibility ramps and/or elevator for access
3. Significant need for upgrade to toilet facilities
4. Install fire protection system
5. Replace single pane windows
6. Replace gymnasium flooring
7. Address drainage issues in the grass field and playground areas
8. Address parking, provide access control, and remove spaces directly adjacent to building
9. Programming Add flexible intervention, specialized educational space, efficient storage
BU ILDING Mli·lil·\1!!it■IIIII--PHl·iiil·E Tecton ARCH I TECTS
LAflMER LANE 1962. 1996 57. 23 405 K-6 39,398
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ L AT I M E R L AN E E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
Site Review and Analysis
1. Access Drives
2. Roadways/Parking
3. Pedestrian Walks
4. Loading/Receiving
5. Grass & Paved Play
6. Playgrounds
7. Storm Drainage
8. Perimeter / Fencing
9. Lighting
BU ILDING Mli·lil·\1!!it■IIIII--PHl·iiil·E Tecton ARCH I TECTS
LAflMER LANE 1962. 1996 57. 23 405 K-6 39,398
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ L AT I M E R L AN E E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
4
Key Site Items
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3 5
6
7
8 7
8
Entry identification
ADA / Stair
Play area drainage
Parking lot capacity
Loading drainage
Access Control
Student bus queue
Access Control
BU ILDING Mli·lil·\1!!it■IIIII--PHl·iiil·E Tecton ARCH I TECTS
LAflMER LANE 1962. 1996 57. 23 405 K-6 39,398
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ L AT I M E R L AN E E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
BU ILDING Tecton ARCH I TECTS
LAflMER LANE 1962, 1996 57, 23 405 K-6 39,398
E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L EXISTING CONDITIONS/ L AT I M E R L AN E
Structure
• Original - Steel frame with
steel framing, poured
gypsum deck roof.
• Addition – steel frame with
metal joist framing & roof
deck
Architecture
• Not ADA compliant, requires
ramp for access to west side
of building, sometimes travel
on exterior
• Building envelope in need of
renovation – replace areas
with single pane windows,
caulk joints, flashings
• Gymnatorium in need of
renovation, flooring in
particular
• Inefficient and antiquated
classroom storage in areas,
locker storage in need of
replacement
• Building circulation a
challenge, sprawling plan,
travel time an issue
BU ILDING YEAR BUILT CURRENT CUR. GRADE
AGE ENROLL. CONFIG. {E) SF AREA Tecton
ARCH I TECTS
LAflMER LANE 1962, 1996 57, 23 405 K-6 39,398
E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L EXISTING CONDITIONS/ L AT I M E R L AN E
Mechanical
• Original Heating Plant 1962
• Original Distribution
Systems
• Exhausted Building, Old
Design
• Limited Air Conditioning
Electrical
• Original Electrical Service
1962
• No Generator
• Old Distribution Systems
• Fire Protection & Alarm
• No Sprinkler System
• Limited Heads From
Domestic Water
• New Full Fire Alarm System
2012
Safety/Security
• Full Perimeter Cameras
• Entry Station at Main Door
-
LATIMER LANE ELEMENTARY
1. ADA accessibility
2. Upgrade toilet facilities
3. Install fire suppression system
4. Address drainage issues in the grass field and playground areas
5. Address parking and provide access control
6. Prepare for replacement of electrical distribution
7. Programming Add flexible intervention, specialized educational space, efficient storage
BUILDING
CENTRAL SCHOOL 1913, 1950,
1997 106, 69, 22
m•+PiiHRE Tecton ARCH ITECTS
375 K-6 60,909
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ C E N T R AL E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
Site Review and Analysis
1. Access Drives
2. Roadways/Parking
3. Pedestrian Walks
4. Loading/Receiving
5. Grass & Paved Play
6. Playgrounds
7. Storm Drainage
8. Perimeter / Fencing
9. Lighting
BUILDING
CENTRAL SCHOOL 1913, 1950,
1997 106, 69, 22
m•+PiiHRE 375 K-6 60,909
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tecton ARCH ITECTS
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ C E N T R AL E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1 3
Key Site Items
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Parent Drop/Pick Up
Bus Loop
Pedestrian Walks
ADA parking/access
Catch basin repair
Dumpster mods
Secure play area & access
Tree/Arborist review
BUILDING
CENTRAL SCHOOL 1913, 1950,
1997 106, 69, 22 375
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
K-6 60,909
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ C E N T R AL E L E M E N T AR Y S C H O O L
BUILDING
CENTRAL SCHOOL 1913, 1950,
1997 106, 69, 22
m•+PiiHRE Tecton ARCH ITECTS
375 K-6 60,909
S C H O O L EXISTING CONDITIONS/ C E N T R AL E L E M E N T AR Y
Structure
• 1913 – wood framed,
bearing wall. 1950 – Steel
joists at roof, concrete Ts at
floor, wall bearing. 1997 – steel framed with wood attic
trusses.
Architecture
• Use of basement in original
building should be
considered for non
educational program
• Envelop repairs at cafeteria
roof
• Envelop repairs – roof
flashing and trim repairs 1997
classroom addition
• Remove and/or relocate
mechanical/electrical
equipment currently located
in classrooms
• Portions of the building – music, office, and 1913
classrooms not ADA
accessible
BUILDING
CENTRAL SCHOOL 1913, 1950,
1997 106, 69, 22 375
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
K-6 60,909
S C H O O L EXISTING CONDITIONS/ C E N T R AL E L E M E N T AR Y
Mechanical
• Two Heating Plants 1997 &
2005
• Original Vintage
Distribution Systems
• Various HVAC System
Types
• Limited Air Conditioning
Electrical
• Good Electrical Service
1997
• No Generator
• Original Vintage
Distribution Systems
Fire Protection & Alarms
• Full Sprinkler System 1997
• New Fire Alarm System
2012
Safety/Security
• Full Perimeter Cameras
• Entry Station at Main Door
–
CENTRAL ELEMENTARY
1. Improve parent and bus drop off
2. Provide access control to site
3. Improve pedestrian access to building
4. Contemplate reuse of underutilized basement for other use (non educational)
5. Upgrade toilet facilities in basement
6. Modify mechanical equipment/systems that reside in
educational spaces
7. Programming provide additional flex classroom space,
smaller group meeting, intervention and special needs space.
BUILDING
HENRY JAMES MIDDLE
Eli·lif,i1ii·Klii•IIIRMP!ii·i·ii·E 1957, 1959, 2000, 2019
62, 60, 19 610 7-8 146,020
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ H E N R Y J AM E S M E M O R I AL S C H O O L
Site Review and Analysis
1. Access Drives
2. Roadways/Parking
3. Pedestrian Walks
4. Loading/Receiving
5. Grass & Paved Play
6. Playgrounds
7. Storm Drainage
8. Perimeter / Fencing
9. Lighting
BUILDING
HENRY JAMES MIDDLE
Eli·lif,i1ii·Klii•IIIRMP!ii·i·ii·E 1957, 1959, 2000, 2019
62, 60, 19 610 7-8 146,020
0 0
•' 0 0 0 0
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ H E N R Y J AM E S M E M O R I AL S C H O O L
5
Key Site Items
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
1
36
5
3
Paving replacement
Regrade parking
ADA entry repairs
Access control
Perimeter fencing
Repair/replace site amenities & provide secure barriers
4
BUILDING
HENRY JAMES MIDDLE 1957, 1959, 2000, 2019
62, 60, 19 610
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
7-8 146,020
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ H E N R Y J AM E S M E M O R I AL S C H O O L
BUILDING
HENRY JAMES MIDDLE
Eli·lif,i1ii·Klii•IIIRMP!ii·i·ii·E 1957, 1959, 2000, 2019
62, 60, 19 610 7-8 146,020
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
M E M O R I AL S C H O O L EXISTING CONDITIONS/ H E N R Y J AM E S
Structure
• Original construction is steel
frame, tectum roof, metal
deck/concrete floor slab.
Additions are steel frame,
open web steel joist framing,
metal deck/concrete slab
Architecture
• Additions and renovations
ongoing
• Some toilet facilities are in
need of upgrades for ADA
and finishes
• Some classroom
millwork/storage is not ADA
compliant nor efficient and
should be replaced
• Some areas of ceiling tile
replacement
• Original kitchen layout and
equipment in need of
upgrades
• Acoustical concerns at
administrative area
BUILDING
HENRY JAMES MIDDLE 1957, 1959, 2000, 2019
62, 60, 19 610
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
7-8 146,020
M E M O R I AL S C H O O L EXISTING CONDITIONS/ H E N R Y J AM E S
Mechanical
• New Heating Plant 2014
• Original Vintage
Distribution Systems
• Original Vintage
Equipment
• Limited Air Conditioning
Electrical
• Good Electrical Service
2000
• No Generator
• Original Vintage
Distribution Systems
Fire Protection & Alarm
• Partial Fire Protection
System
• To be Completed in
Newest Phase
• Full Fire Alarm System 2012
Safety/Security
• Full Perimeter Cameras
• Entry Station at Main Door
–
HENRY JAMES MEMORIAL
SCHOOL
1. Ongoing additions and renovations
2. Renovate toilet facilities
3. Parking and access drive pavement upgrades
4. Security upgrades at exterior of cafeteria
5. Roofing upgrades and or replacement
6. Performing Arts program isolated improvements
7. Kitchen upgrades
BUILDING
SIMSBURY HIGH SCHOOL
n:mn·:::, i •m:taEmlBI 1w.1111111nm1111m_l+M!f-F 1968, 1982,
2005 51 , 37, 14 1419 9-1 2 303,541
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ S I M S B U R Y H I G H S C H O O L
Site Review and Analysis
1. Access Drives
2. Roadways/Parking
3. Pedestrian Walks
4. Loading/Receiving
5. Grass & Paved Play
6. Playgrounds
7. Storm Drainage
8. Perimeter / Fencing
9. Lighting
BUILDING
SIMSBURY HIGH SCHOOL
n:mn·:::, i •m:taEmlBI 1w.1111111nm1111m_l+M!f-F 1968, 1982,
2005 51 , 37, 14 1419 9-1 2 303,541
Q Q
,,. Q '
Q Q Q Q
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ S I M S B U R Y H I G H S C H O O L
1
7
6
2 4
4
3
Key Site Items
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Sidewalk ramps
Drainage at track
Drainage at building
Paving replacement
Remove/Trim Trees
Drainage at modular
Bleacher replacement
3
2
5
~11-SSu~
ii i~ s.: ~ P~ LS. ~~~·r,10~ ··~
BUILDING
SIMSBURY HIGH SCHOOL
n:mn·:::, i •m:taEmlBI 1w.1111111nm1111m_l+M!f-F 1968, 1982,
2005 51 , 37, 14 1419 9-1 2 303,541
al■ •• Tecton ARCH I TECTS
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ S I M S B U R Y H I G H S C H O O L
~11-SSu~
ii i~ s.: ~ P~ LS. ~~~·r,10~ ··~
BUILDING
SIMSBURY HIGH SCHOOL
1968, 1982, 2005
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
51 , 37, 14 1419 9-1 2 303,541
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ S I M S B U R Y H I G H S C H O O L
Structure
• Original construction is steel
frame, poured gypsum roof
deck, precast planks at the
floor. Additions are steel
frame, metal deck and
concrete floor slab, non
bearing walls.
Architecture
• Moisture concerns at south
wall of original construction
@ Band Room / Auditorium
area
• Lockers along with
supporting toilet facilities are
in need of replacement
• Consider replacement of
modular classrooms
• Existing ramp not ADA
compliant (adj. to gym.)
• Roof & insulation(option)
replacement and/or
upgrades
BUILDING
SIMSBURY HIGH SCHOOL
1968, 1982, 2005
51 , 37, 14 1419
Tecton ARCH I TECTS
9-1 2 303,541
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ S I M S B U R Y H I G H S C H O O L
Mechanical
• Good Heating Plant 2005
• Mostly Heating and
Ventilating Systems
• Limited Air Conditioning
• Upper Floors Get Very Hot
Electrical
• Good Electrical Service
2005
• Two Generators
• Good Distribution Systems
Mostly 2005
Fire Protection & Alarm
• Full Sprinkler System 2005
• Full Fire Alarm System 2005
Safety/Security
• Full Perimeter Cameras
• Entry Station at Main Door
SIMSBURY HIGH SCHOOL
1. Mechanical ventilation modifications to 3rd floor
2. Drainage improvements to south façade/footings
3. Improve site drainage at drop off/pick up
4. Renovate locker facilities
5. Art Suite ventilation improvements
6. Bleacher upgrades and or replacement
7. Improvements to site drainage at fields
8. Existing ramp non compliant
NEXT STEPS
ii P~ l5 ·~·
Tecton ARCHITECTS
NEXT STEPS/ WH AT T O E X P E C T
1. Summarize findings of condition study
2. Mtg with Facilities & Enrollment Task Force
3. Hold Public Forum on Progress (Demographics & Existing
Conditions)
4. Prioritize needs – Immediate, mid-range, long term
5. Develop options for reconfiguration ~ Spring/Summer
6. Review options with community & state ~ Fall
7. Finalize master plan & prioritize project(s) ~ Fall
ARCHITECTS Tecton
COMMUNICATION/ K E E P I N G T H E L I N E S O P E N
• District Leadership Meetings
• Meeting Dates: 3rd Wednesday each month, 11 a.m., BOE offices
• Ongoing Facilities & Enrollment Task Force Meetings
• Upcoming Forums
• Review of Existing Conditions
• Potential Options for the Community
• Preferred Options for Consideration
• Summary of 10 Year Master Plan & First Phase
• Create Email for Public Comments
• Create Social Media Page & Webpage
Tecton ARCHITECTS
THANK YOU
SCHOOL FACILITIES M A S TE R P L A N & R E C O N F I G UR A T I O N S TUD Y
P R E S E N TA T I O N TO B O A R D O F E D UC A T I O N
04.23.2019
Recommended