M E M O R A N D U M O F C O N F E R E N C Emontgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/facilities... · MA-10 May 3, 2013 M E M O R A N D U M O F C O N F E R E N C E PROJECT

MA-10

May 3, 2013

M E M O R A N D U M O F C O N F E R E N C E PROJECT Montgomery County Public Schools

Potomac Elementary School Feasibility Study ARCHITECT’S PROJECT NO. 522030 DATE AND LOCATION April 30, 2013, Potomac Elementary School Work Session #6 PRESENT See attached sign-in sheet

DISCUSSIONS AND DECISIONS. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the options under development:

1. Moseley reviewed the process that has occurred in the development of all the options. There are currently four options remaining. Options one and two are new construction, number three utilizes renovations and additions, and the fourth investigates new construction on the Brickyard site. Through the previous meetings, option one was identified as the preferred option. Each of the options on the existing site have been developed with two site plans, one showing a single entrance in the location of the existing and the second with two entrances off of River Road.

2. Comments from the community regarding the building layout and site layouts:

Q: Will moving to the Brickyard site require redistricting?

A: No.

Q: Did MCPS look at the side street access right of way at the existing Potomac site?

A: It has been designated as a stream valley buffer so it is not buildable.

Q: What would happen at the Potomac ES (PES) site if the school is built on the Brickyard Road site, and what would happen on the portion of the Brickyard Road site that would not be needed for the school?

A: That is not known at this time since this is just a feasibility study for the school.

Q: What would be the change in the amount of impervious surface at both sites?

A: There would be no significant change. We have a standard program for educational program space, parking, hard surface play, and the building footprint would be the same or similar on either site. The modernized PES will be a LEED certified school; will have a green roof, and MCPS follows storm water management regulations. The green roof in itself will reduce the amount of impervious surface over what currently exists at PES. There would be no increase in runoff at either site.

RE: Potomac Elementary School Feasibility Study, Montgomery County Public Schools Page 2 05/03/13

Q: In Option 4, why does the school seem to be located so close to the road? Couldn’t it have a less imposing face on the road?

A: The concept plan shows it that way but that could be changed. As shown it is currently 200’ from the road edge, but the building could be moved back. We also have to maintain ADA access from the road to the building.

Q: Why is the bus loop in front as opposed to on the side?

A: MCPS likes to have views from the administration suite to supervise students as they get on and off of the busses.

Q: Why is PES being considered to be moved from the central location on River Road to the Brickyard Road site on the edge of the service area? How can people comment?

A: The Brickyard Road location is being considered following a comment from the community during the feasibility study process. The feasibility study process itself is one way to voice opinions. People also can provide input directly to the superintendent and the Board of Education by writing letters. There are several months before the superintendent will be making his recommendation at the end of October, 2013. There are also public hearings in November when citizens can sign up to testify before the Board of Education makes a decision on which site to utilize.

Q: At the last meeting there was a show of hands and only one person out of 27 attendees preferred the Brickyard site. This was not reflected in the meeting notes.

A: This omission will be corrected. The director of the MCPS Department of Facilities Management and the Chief Operating Officer were made aware that there was a strong preference for the current PES site expressed at the meeting.

Q: Who requested that the Brickyard site be looked at? Did the request come from the school? People do not trust the school board and think MCPS is leaving things out intentionally. They think this was a “planted” question.

A: A community member in attendance at one of the earlier meetings asked if MCPS had considered the Brickyard site. The PTA president said that the vote taken at the last meeting is not representative of the whole community, and that she has heard pros and cons for both sites from parents of students at the school.

Q: Does the decision maker know that there are 20 acres of certified organic soil?

A: Yes. MCPS is aware of the unique nature of the site and its previous use as an organic farm.

Q: What factors will the superintendent consider to make his recommendation on which site to use?


A: Cost, feasibility, design, all community input, and the pros and cons of each option are all taken into consideration.

Q: What is difference in cost of infrastructure at each site?

A: Cost for the site and building for the four options will be developed as part of the feasibility study.

Q: Will the options look at costs? When will the costs be made public?

A: Yes, costs are the next phase. Costs will be determined before the superintendent makes a recommendation.

Q: What is the time frame and transition for PES students?

A: Students at PES will not have to move out of the current facility if the school is modernized on the Brickyard Road site. If PES is modernized on the current site, students will move to Radnor Holding Center for eighteen months during construction. Whatever the location of the modernized school, the modernized school is scheduled to open in January 2018.

Q: What is the condition of the holding center? Is it an existing and a fully functioning school?

A: Yes. The Radnor Holding Center is currently being used as a holding center for Bradley Hills Elementary, and fully functions as an elementary school.

Q: If PES does not move to the Brickyard Road site, what will happens to that property?

A: The Board of Education will retain ownership and has no plans to sell any future school site properties.

Q: People don’t like using the term “feasibility” if MCPS doesn’t have all of the answers and all of the costs for participants to be able to make informed decisions.

A: The purpose of the feasibility study is simply to know if an elementary school can be constructed on the site and will it work and meet the educational program specifications.

Q: How often does the Board of Education disagree with a superintendent’s recommendation?

A: In general if the community is behind a superintendent recommendation, and it achieves the educational objectives for a facility, then the Board is supportive.

Q: If the Brickyard Road site is selected for the modernization, and there is controversy about this decision, then parents are concerned that PES could lose its place in the modernization queue and be delayed.


A: Staff cannot make a guarantee that there wouldn’t be delays due to unforeseen issues, but the Board of Education owns the Brickyard Road property and anticipates its selection should not alter the schedule for the modernization.

Q: Brickyard Road neighbors want an “opportunity cost analysis” done for the Brickyard Road site. They think we will lose great opportunities if the Brickyard Road property, that is rich in organic soil, is used for the school. The school system will lose environmental learning opportunities that the property could provide.

A: MCPS suggests that proponents of the educational use of the Brickyard Road property as an organic farm relay their ideas to the Board of Education. This suggestion is outside the scope of this feasibility study.

Q: Both sites are feasible, but which is preferable? How do people voice their opinions? How is preference factored in?

A: There are four options and one will be noted as preferred. Pros and cons will be shown for all options, as well as the cost of each option. The pros and cons will be included in the feasibility study report.

Q: Will future uses of the Brickyard Road site be considered? And will the rest of the community’s input be factored?

A: If it is not used for the modernization then the Brickyard Road site will continue to be identified as a future school site.

Q: Could the floorplan change if the school moved to the Brickyard Road site or would we be locked into what was presented as Option 4?

A: If we use the Brickyard Road site, the building design will be refined in the design stage. The architect used the preferred configuration for the current PES site as Option 4 on the Brickyard Road site. However, there will be opportunities to look at the layout in more detail and consider alternative schemes if the Brickyard Road site is selected for the modernization.

Q: The PES modernization has been delayed twice and we do not want any further delays.

A: MCPS acknowledges that there have been delays in the modernization queue and wants to keep PES on track for completion in January 2018.

Q: Will external infrastructure work be added in the cost analysis, i.e. road widening and turning lanes?

A: MCPS only funds onsite improvements, but will look at other impacts and will meet with the State Highway Administration, Park and Planning, and the Montgomery County Department of Transportation.


Q: Would Mr. Crispell please describe the decision making process that he described at the PTA meeting?

A: Mr. Crispell described the steps in the feasibility study and design process. Please see notes from meeting #5 for more details.

Q: How many minutes do people get to give testimony to BOE? A participant recommends people to go to the Board of Education meetings and make their voices heard and to write to the Montgomery County Council.

A: Cluster representatives are typically given five minutes or longer if there is a major issue in the cluster. Homeowner associations, civic associations and individuals are given a few minutes.

Q: People have been trying to get a meeting with the Board of Education members and have gotten no response. They feel like they can not engage the Board to save Brickyard site for other educational opportunities, particularly saving the soil for use by students countywide.

A: Staff cannot speak for the Board, but people may write letters to Board members.

Q: If the Brickyard Road site is chosen, Brickyard Road is very narrow, and would probably have to be widened for busses, so who would pay for that? Would property taxes increase to widen the road?

A: MCPS will work with the Montgomery County Department of Transportation to review possible impacts on the roadways.

Q: No official position has been taken by Brickyard Road adjacent landowners or the Brickyard Road coalition, on use of the Brickyard Road site for the PES modernization. They are raising questions as to the process and how the Brickyard Road site came up during the process. It can be expected that 80-90% of students would have added travel time to the Brickyard Road site, and would have to travel through the intersection of Falls Road and River Road. Has there been any progress on the traffic study?

A: We are not funded to do a full traffic study on either site during the feasibility study. The architect and MCPS staff will meet with Montgomery County and Park and Planning staff to look at existing traffic counts and other information before the superintendent’s recommendation.

Q: A Brickyard Road neighbor says there is no “opposition” and doesn’t want to be seen as complaining, but wants to save the Brickyard Road site for future educational opportunities associated with the organic soil. Neighbors feel that the soil is very important and want MCPS to bring the Board’s attention to its value and to prevent the loss of this environmental asset.

A: MCPS acknowledges these comments and will take note of the organic and educational value of the Brickyard Road property.


Q: A participant is frustrated because the concept plans affects building design, and wants to redesign the school to be a more interactive school design with different grades helping each other, such as the oldest students helping the youngest.

A: MCPS is moving away from open classroom design. However, certain program adjacencies are important and MCPS is building schools to have more flexibility than in the past. Canopies, awnings, creative design features and other architectural details will be addressed and shown later in the design phase.

Q: How are the costs of different sites considered?

A: The site, building, and topographic and construction costs will be itemized and tabulated in a chart as part of the feasibility study brochure.

Q: Why hasn’t there been a site selection committee involved in moving to the Brickyard Road site?

A: Site selection is a process for new schools, not modernizations. In this instance there is the one Board of Education owned property in the school service area, the Brickyard Road property.

Q: Why is there not a set budget first, if this is a fictitious design that can change?

A: The budget is developed based on the results of the feasibility study. Much of the cost is associated with the amount of square footage. Even if there are some changes to the design, the program square footages will not change much, even if corridors and spaces are shifted around.

Q: There are many different school designs in MCPS. Are the costs per square foot similar? Do architects talk to newly built schools to see what they like and don’t like about their schools?

A: Staff gave three examples of recently completed schools: Farmland ES, Carderock Springs ES, and Flora Singer ES, and briefly described the nature of the designs of those facilities and key features. MCPS is trying to build opportunities for environmental interaction at every school.

Q: What is the schedule, when is budget developed, is there public input before superintendent makes his recommendation, and when and how does public learn what the budget is?

A: The architect will develop a budget for each option before the superintendent makes a recommendation on which site to use. A link will be posted on the school website when the feasibility study is completed so the public can view the results.

Q: People on sign in sheet for tonight’s meeting want to be notified by email when the feasibility study brochure is complete and available.

A: MCPS will notify attendees by email.

Q: Which is better design? The “T” option or the “courtyard” option?


A: Both designs are successful and it is mostly a matter of preference. The courtyard option does provide better visibility down the corridors. The PTA representative said that from the earliest meetings they wanted a courtyard design to ensure that there would be a safe enclosed outdoor space where children could go if there is ever an incident such as the sniper incident that occurred a few years ago. The courtyard also provides a good opportunity for garden projects.

Q: What is the size of the proposed courtyard?

A: It is approximately 100x100. It will provide natural light into the classrooms that have windows facing into the courtyard.

Q: Will the school have a fully functional kitchen?

A: PES will just have a warming kitchen. All meals are cooked at the central food processing center and delivered to schools.

The above information is the writer’s recollection of the discussions and decisions at the meeting. Should there be any additions or corrections, please notify the writer within two weeks of distribution for correction.

NOTES BY:

Jim Henderson, AIA

POTOMAC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MODERNIZATION STUDY WORK SESSION #6 – APRIL 30, 2013

Montgomery County Public Schools

Jim Henderson, AIA, LEED BD+C Managing Principal

Potomac Elementary School Modernization Study

Meeting Schedule

Work Session #1 – February 6, 6:30pm


Work Session #3 – March 7, 7:00 pm

Work Session #4 – March 19, 3:45pm

Work Session #5 – April 18, 7:00pm

Work Session #6 – April 30, 7:00 pm

PTA Presentation – May 15, 7:00 pm


Work Session #1 – Idea Mining


Work Session #2

1 3 2

4 5


2.1

5.1 3.1

1.1

Work Session #3


Work Session #4 (Options re-numbered)

1

3

2


Work Session #5 (Brickyard Road discussion started)


Existing Site Plan – River Road Site


Option 1 – Site Plan – Two Entrances (River Road)


Option 1 – Site Plan – One Entrance (River Road)


Option 1 – Lower Floor Plan


Option 1 – Upper Floor Plan


Option 2 – Site Plan – Two Entrances (River Road)


Option 2 – Site Plan – One Entrance (River Road)




Option 2– Upper Floor Plan


Option 3 – Site Plan (River Road)






Existing Site Plan – Brickyard Road Site


Option 4 – Site Plan (Brickyard Road)







Meeting Schedule



Work Session #3 – March 7, 7:00 pm

Work Session #4 – March 19, 3:45pm

Work Session #5 – April 18, 7:00pm

Work Session #6 – April 30, 7:00 pm

PTA Presentation – May 15, 7:00 pm


www.moseleyprojects.com

Documents

M E M O R A N D U M O F C O N F E R E N C Emontgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/facilities... · MA-10 May 3, 2013 M E M O R A N D U M O F C O N F E R E N C E PROJECT