Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 4/21/2021
LONGMEADOW –The Middle School Facilities Report highlighted the pressing needs for the two middle school buildings in Longmeadow: Williams Middle School and Glenbrook Middle School. In 2015, the School Committee received site assessments from JCJ Architecture. This year, the board requested an assessment from Colliers.
Following the most recent walk-through of these two older facilities –Williams was built in 1967 and Glenbrook in 1959 – Senior Director in the Northern New England Region Alan Minkus pointed out the pressing needs in the earlier report have now become critical.
To address the needs of the facilities, Minkus discussed how best to approach the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA). The mission of the MSBA is to partner with Massachusetts communities to support the design and construction of educationally appropriate, flexible, sustainable and cost-effective public school facilities.
The MSBA typically receives 90 applications in a year with only 10-12 projects making it into the "capital pipeline." Having looked at the town's previous applications and evaluating other successful statements that resulted in acceptance, Minkus said the approach taken by the town in its application or Statement of Intent (SOI) is the key to having the ability to work with the MSBA.
Senior Project Manager overseeing the facilities’ conditions assessment (FCA) Chip Phillips put forth a presentation outlining the current conditions of both schools and broke down the needs by three priority levels: Those that need immediate attention (level one), those that need to be accomplished within the next five or so years (level two), and those that could be deferred.
The Colliers’ in-person assessment was only to bring about recommendations to get the schools back to their original 1959/1967 status. Phillips stated that the assessment, “does not address overall program issues, only strictly fixing what is there. A key decision point is looking at the costs involved to just fix the buildings.”
The assessment team went through both schools in March and checked the entire physical buildings from the roof to the basement, evaluated the architectural status of the building, looked into the HVAC, electrical and plumbing systems, and seeing if there were any possible code violations, and observed the accessibility to grounds of the school. The primary focus was looking at deferred maintenance capital projects and not overall educational needs.
Phillips stated they identified almost 200 individual projects across the two schools at a cost of $30.2 million just to fix what is there. Priority one projects took up more than half of that total at $17.6 million. Priority two was another $10 million, and are those things should be done over the next five years. Priority three, or those that are considered deferred, amounted to $2.9 million.
Williams had the greater general need with costs totaling $14.1 million, but Glenbrook had more priority one needs with a $16.1 million total. Phillips went on to outline the needs for each school.
Williams Middle School
As reported by Phillips, the exterior shell is the highest priority. The roof needs replacing as do the windows – the glazing compound is rotting and the windows are loose. The chimney has some pretty severe cracks in it.
In the interior parts of the school, doors and casements need replacing and auditorium seating is in poor condition (for both schools). Asbestos is suspected in the ceiling tiles and the flooring. The ceiling’s become an issue because of leaks coming onto the glue-on ceilings that need to be addressed.
The HVAC system is a concern. Some of the air handling units, original to the building and 62 years old, should be replaced in the next three years but the bulk of the system should be done within the next 5-10 years.
As for the electrical, which has the original switchgear (62 years old) can be done a little bit down the road, according to Phillips.
Statutory is another area with a high priority one need - sprinklers, and addressing the vestibule for security reasons and the vat floor tile should be replaced.
Glenbrook Middle School
The interior shell has the highest need, but the HVAC is the most urgent need as the system is mostly original to 1967 and has outrun its usefulness. The electrical is one of biggest concerns for the school and, though not as expensive, it is critical. The electrical system is made up of old Federal Pacific equipment. The company went out of business about 25-30 years ago and parts are not available.
As the entry layout stands currently, it is difficult to secure the building. Colliers is recommending a reconfiguration of the main entrance and offices to provide a man trap entrance and direct traffic to the front office when entering the school.
Interior doors and walls are also a concern as there is no current way to perform a lockdown of the school. The lack of proper sound barriers and outdated door latches with some unable to be secured from the interior of the class area are priorities for the school.
The exterior shell needs include the roof, which has a lot of patching and numerous leaks along the flashing where the roof meets the masonry on the upper walls.
The grounds issues are mainly related to the paving, and the irrigation system is no longer functioning.
Identified statutory issues include a lack of a sprinkler system and the lack of an elevator to get to other levels. Currently, students and staff have to around outside the building to get from level to level and the doors that do exist are too narrow to meet ADA guidelines.
Facilities Director Nick Georgantas commented. “Being in the time of the pandemic, HVAC concerns are at the top of [my list] right now. I worry a lot about systems failing because then we can't have any extra air exchanged in these buildings. … It is really important that we are able to continue with our programs on a day-to-day basis and it starts with our HVAC systems." Another top concern for Georgantas is the roofs. “A roof leak leads to a lot of other issues – it accelerates building decay and it damages a lot of other systems,” Georgantas said. New roofs have continued to be deferred in the hopes of eventually getting a new middle school. “There certainly are things that keep me up at night,” Georgantas added.
Phillips then summed up the results by stating that if the town does everything on the list, the result will be, essentially, a return to 1959 and 1967 school buildings. You won’t have rooms that meet current state guidelines for space at Glenbrook, and the rooms would not have the flexibility to meet the needs of current school programs. The schools won’t have the support spaces that a current school would have, particularly as it relates to special education, Phillips said. The schools will not be fully compliant and accessible, Phillips added. “By fixing things, you would not be addressing current [educational] program needs,” said Phillips.
New Construction
Minkus then went on to present the possibility of having either one or two new schools. One new school could handle the 700+ currently in the system, but when it comes to approaching the MSBA, another approach could work out for the best.
If Longmeadow’s middle school needs were to become a part of the MSBA capital program, it would need to be broken down to two enrollment figures: 330 students for Williams, 375 for Glenbrook. The cost of the two projects would be $93.7 million, and the maximum reimbursement from the grant for two new buildings, allowing for MSBA caps for certain line items, would be approx. $35 million. This would leave about $59 million for the town to pay. Minkus said to look at that figure against the $30 million to refurbish the two schools to get them back to their original states.
If the town decided to build one large school with an enrollment of 700, the total came out to $77.4 million. The town’s share would be approximately $49.2 million after the maximum reimbursement from MSBA at a total of $28 million.
Phillips then stated that a lot of the concerns outlined have been brought forward in other reports over the years – these are not new problems. “This is the point when these will start having major impacts in the near future – not as long as five years, but sooner,” said Phillips. “This is the time when things become harder and harder – parts are difficult to find, and fixes become much more expensive. These have been deferred and deferred and deferred. … You’ve been putting this off long enough.”
Committee member Jamie Hensch asked Georgantas, “How close to the brink are we?”
Georgantas replied, “To me, time is up for the roofs at both sites. But it is difficult to justify the cost to change the roofs if [we’re] just going to tear down the buildings in a few years.”
Committee member Susan Bell agreed. “How you’re going to incur more costs is by waiting. That’s really where the hidden costs are, and that’s the challenge that we face – we keep submitting these requests and statements of interest (SOIs) and we’re not getting anywhere … How do we push this so people recognize the need? We have done our due diligence.”
Superintendent M. Martin O’Shea stated, “The next steps are to create a compelling SOI, get the attention of the MSBA, get invited into the program, and then the possibilities will open up. The committee has until June to submit another SOI.”
Minkus shared several examples of how successful school districts put forth a request with the most alarming needs to the MSBA to catch their attention. The districts then went on to address the needs of multiple schools with the MSBA and then ended up building a combined school to address several issues across several old schools.
At the moment, the town will need to take on some projects to keep the schools functioning. It generally takes six to seven years for the process of addressing the needs through the MSBA to be completed:
•Spring, 2021: submission of SOI
•April 2021 through December 2021: MSBA review
•January 2022 through October 2022: Feasibility Study (requires Town Meeting approval)
•October 2022 to September 2023: Owner’s Project Manager process, selection and approval of Designer, Contracts created
•Fall 2023-Fall 2025: Selection of project including its scope and budget (requires Town Meeting approval)
•Fall 2025-Fall 2027: Final design, construction, opening.