• II. Building Concepts
    Q: What findings from 2009 are still under consideration (i.e., site determination)?
    A: The current concepts are based on the 2009 District Wide Facilities Master Plan with the addition of Concept E which is a new site for the high school. The school board decided to add this additional possibility to evaluate if it was more cost efficient or provided better support of the high school program.
    Q: Renovate vs. starting over what would happen with current buildings?
    A: It is too early to determine future use of the Westerly Parkway location and buildings if the high school facility were built on a different site. Selling the land is only one of many possible scenarios. If Concept E (new site) is one of the final project concepts, potential plans for the current campus would need to be considered.
    Q: Where will the new facility be?
    A: We are still evaluating several concepts for the high school including building a new facility. Concepts A, B, and D may involve new construction on Westerly Parkway. Concepts E and F involve a new location. After evaluating 28 possible sites, three sites remain that could permit construction of a new high school. All are near the demographic center of the district and all are large enough to accommodate a school and full athletic facilities. Detailed descriptions are available on our website at www.scasd.org/highschoolproject. Click on “concepts being considered,” followed by “other building sites.”
    Q: Will there be one or two buildings, and will they be separated?
    A: The various concepts address this in different ways. Detailed descriptions are available on our website at www.scasd.org/highschoolproject. Click on “concepts being considered.”
    Q: Will it fix the flooding? Are the flooding problems at the current site able to be solved with new renovations or construction? Or would a new site be better or cheaper than flood remediation?
    A: Any option that includes staying on Westerly Parkway must include a feasible solution to the flooding in order to considered a viable long-term option.
    Q: What about building two schools?
    A: This is currently being studied as Concept F.
    Q: Have you considered putting solar on the HS roofs, with grant funding, and then when the school is minimally used in the summer, sell the excess electricity back to the utility company? (A high school in Montgomery County, MD, has done this successfully. They use the technology as part of their AP Environmental Science class.)
    A: This is part of our LEED analysis. As stated, grant money would be needed to make this fiscally responsible.
    Q: If you do create a walkway, could it be modeled like the Penn State IST walkway across Atherton?
    A: The success of any option that “bridges” Westerly Parkway will be predicated on building additions closer to the road and integrating the buildings into the bridge/walkway which could be similar to the IST model.
    Q: How can we design/incorporate flexibility since we are living in an era of rapid change?
    A: Flexibility is a key design issue. All new construction will be designed specifically for flexible use; flexibility will be more limited in any portion of the building(s) that is minimally renovated.
    Q: Given that a two building campus effectively provides zero security regarding entering the buildings, why is Concept B even under consideration at all?
    A: Concept B includes provisions for campus security through either a bridge attached to the buildings or through a controlled access street crossing. The controlled access crossing, if pursued, would limit student (and all other) access to each building through a single, monitored entrance. Concept C retains the current high school footprint which includes many entrances and presents security challenges.
    Q: How long can we anticipate a new structure will be adequate?
    A: Based on equipment life cycles, the building should function well for the next 20 to 30 years. Of course, the envelope of a building should last much longer and the building itself should exceed a 50 year lifespan.
    Q: To me, incorporating principles of “universal design” is as important, if not more important, than following LEED. How are we addressing this so it is not an afterthought or footnote?
    A: As the design process continues, the architects will incorporate green building techniques as well as the principles of universal design to ensure a building that is sustainable, environmentally friendly, and accessible to people with and without disabilities. LEED is one tool for measuring building sustainability.
    Q: If we want to save the athletic facilities on the north side, why not consider one building on the north side? Why not save additional architect fees and use the plans done in 2007?
    A: According to the most recent studies, the south topography far better suits additional building (new/renovated) for a number of reasons, including, but not limited to, available space and far better stormwater management.
    The plans from 2007 needed to be updated with the benefit of program information from the current educational planning process. The 2007 plan met with strong opposition at the time and was therefore not included as a concept because the high school project will need to be approved by a voter referendum.
    Q: Where would students go during renovation?
    A: If an alternate site is chosen, students will continue to use the Westerly Parkway buildings until the new facility is ready for occupancy. For all concepts on the current site, a construction phasing plan would be implemented for students. In some cases, they will be able to remain in the current facilities for the majority of the time while the new construction piece is being completed, and then will move into the new construction while the rest is renovated. Modular classrooms may also be brought to the Westerly site to house students as needed during the construction phase of the project.
    Q: Are we considering any three story options/footprints for this project?
    A: Once the final concept is selected, the architects will develop schematic designs. At that point, many scenarios for the actual building will be considered.
    Q: In Concept A, with two new buildings housing grades 9-10 on the south side and grades 11-12 on the north side, would students still travel between buildings and cross the street?
    A: In this concept students will still need to travel between buildings. Travel distances may increase depending on where the buildings are located.
    Q: What are the other sites being considered?
    A: We started with a list of potential sites. All were evaluated according to certain criteria, including acreage (must be larger than current site > 79 acres), frontage or access within ½ mile to major transportation corridor and distance from district demographic center (5 mile limit). If a site met those initial criteria, current property owners were contacted to determine if there was any interest in selling the property. Following extensive evaluation, three potential sites remain. Detailed descriptions are available on our website at www.scasd.org/highschoolproject.
    Q: What is the growth boundary and how does it affect our evaluation of sites or potential selection of a site?
    A: The growth boundary matches the public sewer service area. In order for a building to have public sewer service, it must be within the growth boundary. During the initial evaluation of sites, we included sites inside and outside the growth boundary. If there is strong community interest in pursuing Concept E or F, we will begin the process of seeking municipal approval to amend the growth boundary.
    Q: When evaluating the two-school options, has it been considered to keep resources shared (i.e., athletic varsity teams, pool, band)?
    A: The leading reason community members gave for considering a two- school concept was the availability of multiple/more opportunities for students. Therefore we included the costs of duplicated programs in both schools so that equal opportunities would be available to all students, regardless of high school (CTC, athletics, staffing, etc.)
    Q: The options listed use property on the south side of Westerly, what about using property on the north side, known as Community Field?
    A: The architects have reviewed the north campus and determined that unless Community Field was used for building space, the north campus did not provide as much usable space and flexibility as the south side did. Community Field houses the only district-owned fields for baseball, softball and tennis and many community members have expressed a desire to maintain this asset (Community Field) as it currently exists.
    Q: Do we have an idea of move in ready timing?
    A: Following approval of a referendum, we anticipate approximately a year to complete the design process for the approved project.The duration of construction varies significantly depending on which concept is approved. We have an estimate for the duration/ phasing for each concept. Some of the phasing scenarios can draw out construction significantly; in general, though, you can anticipate anywhere from 24-36 months of actual construction until itʼs actually complete. Assuming the referendum is held as currently anticipated in May 2014, and a project is approved, we would anticipate building occupancy in late 2017/early 2018.
Last Modified on May 15, 2013