FCPS Liberty Elementary School Feasibility Study …...2019/02/14 · Liberty Elementary School PAA...

FCPS Liberty Elementary School Feasibility Study Meeting #6 – Notes PAA Project #18‐35 Meeting Date: February 14, 2019 – FCPS Central Office Board Room Meeting started at 2:00 pm Meeting ended at 3:20 pm Attendees: FCPS Educational Planning Team Holly Nelson – FCPS Facilities Planner Adnan Mamoon – FCPS Director of Capital Programs Kim Day – FCPS Curriculum & Instruction Steve Raff – FCPS Elementary Director Dawn Worrell – FCPS Construction Accountant Patrick Little – FCPS Maintenance Design Team Kori Purdum Matheis – Proffitt & Associates – Principal Architect Madalyn Burns – Proffitt & Associates – Senior Architectural Designer

Meeting Discussion: 6.1 Project Overview

A. Schedule – Kori provide an update on the schedule, we are on track for completion of the draft study booklet by March 14.

B. ALTA Survey Status – Survey should be complete by late February, weather permitting.

6.2 Review updated conceptual design options and proposed phasing of construction A. Option 1 ‐ Renovations and Additions with partial demolition

1. In this option: a. Construction phasing was proposed as follows:

Phase 1 ‐ Existing building and driveways would remain in use. Construction of new bus loop from Daysville Road.

Phase 2 ‐ New bus loop from Daysville Road completed and in use. Existing building and Route 26 driveway would remain in use. Demolish

Feasibility Study Meeting #6 – Notes Liberty Elementary School PAA Project #18‐35 February 14, 2019 of 6

portion of existing Daysville driveway and existing bus loop/parking. Construction of north addition, soft and paved play areas, and building services driveway.

Phase 3 ‐ North addition, play areas, and building services driveway are completed and ready to use. The north addition includes a public entrance, Gymnasium, Cafeteria, food services, building services, music classrooms and a classroom cluster. Existing Route 26 driveway would remain in use. All of existing 1960s building and north portion of existing 1980s building retained and in use. Demolish south portion of 1980s building (Media Center plus two classrooms) and entirety of 1950s building.

Phase 4 ‐ Demolish Route 26 driveway. Construction of south addition, pre‐k play area, and car/parking loop from Route 26.

Final ‐ South addition, pre‐k play and car/parking loop from Route 26 are all complete and ready for use. South addition includes the new entry, media center, kindergarten classrooms, art classrooms and support spaces.

2. Changes from previous meeting: a. Added secondary entrance/exit from car loop to Daysville Road. b. Removed softball field and replaced with open green space.

3. Pros for this layout include: a. Classroom layouts cluster well for grade level grouping. b. Simplified floor elevations compared to Option 2 – only one level at first floor,

two levels for second floor. c. Additions envelop the existing building – will allow for a new unified façade

design, visible from both roads. d. Good separation of buses, cars, and building services/loading. e. Lots of car queuing space.

4. Cons/action items for this layout include a. Keeping existing 1960s two‐story addition and tying the new two‐story structures

into it may create a hardship in terms of ceiling height. Ramping will be required along the second‐floor corridor in order to provide greater floor‐to‐floor height at the addition than in the existing building.

b. Green space is far from the school and is awkward to have to access via narrow space between bus loop and drop‐off loop.

c. The Media Center and many support spaces do not have access to views to the exterior. Daylight could still be incorporated via clerestory windows however.

d. Car queuing will block parking.

B. Option 2 ‐ Renovations and Additions with limited demolition 1. In this option:

a. Construction phasing would be as follows: Phase 1 ‐ Existing 1950s and 1980s portion of building and driveways would

remain in use. Construction of new bus loop from Daysville Road.


Demolish existing 1960s portion in its entirety. Minor modification to the existing Daysville driveway/bus loop will be required in order to complete this phase.

Phase 2 ‐ New bus loop from Daysville Road complete and ready to use. Portion of existing building and Route 26 driveway would remain in use. Demolish Daysville driveway/bus loop. Construction of east addition, soft and paved play areas, and building services driveway.

Phase 3 ‐ East addition, play areas and building services driveway complete and ready to use. East addition includes a public entrance, Gymnasium, Cafeteria, food services, building services, music, and a two‐story addition with kindergarten classrooms and support spaces on the lower level and new classrooms and support spaces on the main level. Renovation of existing gymnasium and cafeteria. Existing Route 26 driveway would be demolished. Construction of drop‐off/parking loop from Route 26.

Phase 4 ‐ Drop‐off/parking loop from Route 26 is complete and ready to use. Existing gymnasium has been renovated and is ready to occupy as a new media center. The existing cafeteria has been converted to a new administration suite and is ready to occupy. Renovation of existing administration and media center spaces occurs once these functions can move into their newly renovated areas.

Final ‐ Renovations of the existing administration suite to serve as new classrooms and support spaces and existing media center to be new art classrooms are completed and ready to occupy.

2. Changes from previous meeting: a. Added secondary entrance/exit from car loop to Daysville Road. b. Relocated bus loop, paved and soft play areas. c. Removed softball field and replaced with open green space.

3. Pros for this layout include: a. Good separation of buses and cars. b. Lots of car queuing space. c. More open green space/play area compared to Option 1. d. Retains more of existing recently replaced roof.

4. Cons/action items for this layout include a. Administration suite and new main entrance on lower level are not desirable

because of separation from other spaces and low ceiling heights. b. Possible conflicts for construction of east classroom addition if the existing

foundations from the 1920s building were not fully demolished. Possibly additional costs for hazardous material abatement.

c. Lots of changes in elevation on main level, three ramps in both of the corridors. d. More of the existing building façade to remain and require upgrades. e. Kindergarten and Pre‐K are on a different floor level than gymnasium, cafeteria,

and specials. f. Car queuing will block parking.


C. Option 3A ‐ New construction

1. In this option: a. The proposed school is similar to the footprint of the future elementary school

prototype (East County Elementary). b. The new facility is sited so that it can be constructed while the existing building

remains operational, then once it is occupied, the existing building can be demolished.

c. The main entry wing with administration and art classrooms is located to the north east and faces Route 26. The two‐story classroom wings are located to the south. The public spaces including, music, cafeteria and gymnasium are located to the north west.

d. Car rider drop off loop and main parking would be accessed from Route 26. The driveway entrance is relocated to the crest of the hill along Route 26 for better visibility.

e. Bus loop, additional parking and building services would be accessed from Daysville Road.

f. Paved and soft play areas are located near the gymnasium and cafeteria. 2. Changes from previous meeting:

a. Flip administration wing with classroom wing. b. Relocated bus and car loop. c. Reconfigured paved and soft play areas. d. Removed softball field and replaced with open green space.

3. Pros of this layout include: a. New school can be constructed without demolition of the existing building.

Seems like a cheaper option compared to occupied construction. All students remain on site.

b. Daylight provided to all classrooms. c. Good separation of buses, cars, and building services/loading. d. Lots of car queuing space. e. Parking and bus drop off are both close to the main entry.

4. Cons/action items for this layout include: a. Least amount of open green space b. Not possible to bring second entrance/exit from Daysville Road due to position of

building. c. Car traffic onto Route 26. d. Car queuing will block parking.

D. Option 3B ‐ New construction

1. In this option: a. The proposed school is similar to the footprint of the future elementary school

prototype (East County Elementary). b. The new facility is sited so that the existing building will be demolished and then

the new school is constructed.


c. The main entry wing with administration and art classrooms is located to the south west and faces Route 26. The two‐story classroom wings are located to the east. The public spaces including, music, cafeteria and gymnasium are located to the north west.

d. Car rider drop off loop and main parking would be accessed from Daysville. e. Bus loop, additional parking and building services would be accessed from Route

26. f. Paved and soft play areas and softball fields are located near the gymnasium and

cafeteria. 2. Changes from previous meeting:

e. Flip administration wing with classroom wing. f. Removed softball field and replaced with open green space.

3. Pros of this layout include: a. Demolition of existing building prior to starting construction of the new building

allows building to be pulled closer to Rt 26 and preserves more open green space along Daysville.

b. Daylight provided to all classrooms. c. Good separation of buses, cars, and building services/loading. d. Lots of car queuing space.

4. Cons/action items for this layout include: a. Students will either have to be relocated to another facility off‐site or portables

will need to be brought on‐site to house students during the demolition and new construction process.

b. Bus traffic in and out on 26 may not be feasible. Look at an option showing cars and buses enter from Daysville then split on site.

c. Car queuing will block parking. d. Visitor parking is on the opposite side of the building from the main entry – this

doesn’t work from a security standpoint, buses and visitor parking should be switched.

E. General discussion during review of options:

1. Reviewed schools with similar occupied renovations and phasing where students remained on site. Similar FCPS schools include West Frederick Middle, Brunswick Middle, Thurmont Middle, and Waverley Elementary. Will need to consider risks, costs and challenges.

2. Holly will get feedback from the Director of Transportation about bringing bus traffic in and out on Route 26.

3. For option 3B, price for having portables on site. Gymnasium could be in a tent structure. Cafeterias could be compromised of multiple portables, or students could eat lunch in their classrooms.

4. For final presentation, give detailed scheduling information ‐ i.e. construct parking loop during the summer, hold for six months than commence demolition/construction the next summer.


5. The existing building will require significant upgrades include all new door hardware, plumbing fixtures and accessible restrooms, etc.

6. Signage and building elevation/features can be used to distinguish main entry. 7. Steve is adamantly against moving kids off site (because this elementary school has the

largest feeder area) or using temporary facilities because they will be tough sells. Prefers all elementary grades under one roof rather than the idea of having a separate primary facility.

6.3 Recap feedback from Community Meeting #2 A. There were mixed responses from the Community. Generally liked the idea of salvaging the

existing building but not the final results or retaining the existing spaces. Concerned of length of construction time/phasing and impact for students. Want to pay homage to history of Liberty similar to the Linganore High School vestibule.

B. There was concern about relocating the students because of transportation distance and possibly students being separated.

C. Holly would like to ask teachers and students for additional input.

6.4 Discuss materials and systems for proposed construction A. To begin preparing cost estimates we will move forward with additions/new construction

will be steel frame with masonry exterior and a mix of masonry and gypsum board interiors.

6.5 Two week look‐ahead A. The design team will continue working on the ALTA survey, modification of sketch options of

the replacement, additions/renovations options, and prepare cost estimates to share at the

next meeting.

The next regular design team meeting has been rescheduled for Friday, March 8, 2019 from 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM at Liberty Elementary School. This summarizes the topics discussed at the meeting. Please review and address any comments and corrections to the Architect within 5 days of receipt of these minutes.

Kori Purdum Matheis, AIA, LEED AP BD+C Distribution via email – all attendees & design committee members Attachments:

Meeting #6 Presentation Slides

L I B E R T Y E L E M E N TA RY S C H O O LF E A S I B I L I T Y S T U D YF R E D E R I C K C O U N T Y P U B L I C S C H O O L S

F E A S I B I L I T Y S T U D Y M E E T I N G # 6F e b r u a r y 1 4 , 2 0 1 9

AGENDA

MEETING TOPICS:1. Project Overview

a. Scheduleb. ALTA Survey Status

2. Review updated conceptual design options and proposed phasing of construction

a. Renovations and Additions with partial demolitionb. Renovations and Additions with limited demolitionc. New Constructiond. Discuss pros/cons of each – which goals are addressed and which are not?

3. Recap feedback from Community Meeting #24. Discuss materials and systems for proposed construction

P R O J E C T S C H E D U L E

EXISTING FLOOR PLAN

M A I N L E V E L I S A P P R O X . 2 8 , 5 0 0 G S F

3

3

K

K

2 2

1

1

55

4

4

YM

CA

MU

SIC

SP

EC

.E

D.

AR

T

E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S

SITE AERIAL PHOTO

E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S

FEASIBILITY STUDY OPTIONS

P R O J E C T A P P R O A C H

Option 1 Option 2 Option 3A

New Construction –Replacement

Construction of an entirely new facility on

the existing site to meet the Ed. Spec.

requirements and then demolition of the entire

existing building.

Option 3B

New Construction –Replacement

Demolition of the entire existing building prior to

construction of an entirely new facility on

the existing site to meet the Ed. Spec. requirements.

Renovation and additions with partial

demolition

Complete renovation of the existing facility to remain, demolition of

over half of the existing building, and

construction of additional space to meet the Ed. Spec. requirements.

Renovation and additions with limited

demolition

Complete renovation of the existing facility to

remain, demolition of a limited portion of the existing building, and

construction of additional space to meet the Ed. Spec. requirements.

ADDITION / RENOVATION OPTION #1PHASE 1

C O N C E P T S I T E P L A N

ADDITION / RENOVATION OPTION #1FLOOR PLANS

C O N C E P T F L O O R P L A N

BASE BID

L O W E R L E V E L

U P P E R L E V E L



L O W E R L E V E L

U P P E R L E V E L

FUTURE EXPANSION



L O W E R L E V E L

U P P E R L E V E L

BASE BID

FUTURE EXPANSION



L O W E R L E V E L

U P P E R L E V E L

REPLACEMENT OPTION #3APHASE 1


REPLACEMENT OPTION #3APHASE 2


REPLACEMENT OPTION #3BPHASE 1


REPLACEMENT OPTION #3BPHASE 2


REPLACEMENT OPTION #3A & 3BFLOOR PLANS


L O W E R L E V E L

U P P E R L E V E L

C O M M U N I T Y M E E T I N G # 2Q U E S T I O N S & C O M M E N T S

• Which options are cheapest/quickest/easiest for construction and students?• Will have more cost information at the meeting next month. Options 1 & 2 will require

large amount of upgrades, phasing and longer construction. • Plans for where students would go during construction (3A & 3B)? Will students be split up

similar to Linganore?• Temporary modular classrooms and/or busing elsewhere. Students stay together.

• Are 3D renderings available?• No – more detailed drawings in the design phase

• Any reason why strange shapes/angles/not compact?• We try to match existing circulation/provide daylight/site constraints and

setbacks/classroom clusters• Will the memorials (i.e. trees, historic photographs, and gravestones) be preserved?

• Yes – memorials can be relocated and design can include displays for history.• Will the new school include elevators and be accessible?

• Yes – all options will require modernizing for accessibility.• Can options 3A and 3B include two access points like Options 1 and 2? Can cars and

buses enter in the same way then separate to loops?• We most likely can not fit a cut thru but can possibly connect the bus and car loops.

Option 1 & 2 Pros• Saving some existing portions• Kids less interrupted• Two access routes for parents

Option 1 & 2 Cons• Two access routes could be used as a

pass thru for non-school vehicles –gates?

C O M M U N I T Y M E E T I N G # 2F E E D B A C K

Option 3A Pros• Quicker construction• Students stay on site and together• Drawn to newer building – seems

easier and quicker than renovations and phasing

Option 3A Cons• Less green space• Would a traffic director be needed for

the bus entrance/exit on 26?


Option 3B Pros• Quicker construction• Drawn to newer building – seems

easier and quicker than renovations and phasing

Option 3B Cons• Less green space• Inconvenient for kids and parents to

relocate temporarily• All kids must be kept together if this

option is chosen • Would a traffic director be needed for

the bus entrance/exit on 26?


FCPS Liberty Elementary School Feasibility Study …...2019/02/14 · Liberty Elementary School PAA...

Documents

Transcript of FCPS Liberty Elementary School Feasibility Study …...2019/02/14 · Liberty Elementary School PAA...