Meeting previews school proposal
By Suzanne Hodgson
Staff Writer
South Portland’s Secondary School Facilities Committee is back with a new outlook, new budget and new plan for a modern high school.
A joint meeting between the council and the school board Tuesday gave the public, council and school board a chance to question the committee on what the high school needs, how a new proposed plan differs from a 2007 plan and why they want to put the question to voters next June.
The issue of the aging building has led to accreditation problems with the New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC), which conducted a 10-year evaluation that included teachers, programs and the facilities.
NEASC identified 17 problems with the building, and in a letter to Principal Jeanne Crocker this April referred to “the serious level of structural decay of the facility.”
The level of structural decay was apparent during a tour Tuesday of the building. Windows are nailed to the building so they won’t fall out the other side; a large crack has formed in one room where the original 1950s building is pulling away from the 1979 addition; and 11 separate levels throughout the three-story building make handicapped access at the current building cumbersome.
Handicapped students and adults use an antiquated elevator system that stops six times as it goes up three stories and opens into a classroom. A different lift in a glass-enclosed room also carries handicapped students to the gym. Crocker says most handicapped students would rather make their way around the outside of the building.
The school does have accreditation, but with a warning.
“Warnings are not abnormal now for schools. Most schools usually have between 60 and 100 recommendations from NEASC,” said Crocker. South Portland High School has 20 recommendations in addition to the building concerns.
If the NEASC recommendations are not addressed five years after the recommendations are made, the school could be put on probation. That might affect students applying to colleges because the accreditation probation would show up on student transcripts, Crocker said.
“Some [colleges] go on history of the high school, some will have grave concern if students come from a high school on probation,” said Crocker.
After the NEASC walk through, voters passed $5.8 million in June to address some health and safety issues to the high school and Mahoney and Memorial Middle Schools. The high school used part of the money to put in a new sprinkler system. Crocker says the money was spent so even if reconstruction of the school does eventually pass, the work done with the money would not be wasted.
A $56 million school was on the ballot in 2007, but voters rejected the plan 3 to 1. The Secondary School Facilities Committee hopes a lower cost will be more appealing to voters. South Portland Superintendent Suzanne Godin says she wants to keep the cost around $40 million, which would include the addition of 76,000 square feet to the existing school.
Dan Robbins, estimator for Harriman Associates, the architects working with the South Portland school project, said many recent construction projects have cost less than projected budgets.
“There has been a drop in development cost due to economy and market, I don’t see it changing,” said Robbins.
Scott Pakulsk,i facilities manager for Harriman Associates, showed how the new proposal would use less room than the previously proposed school by building a two-story gym instead of a larger one-story gym, condensing the new building and not building another turf field.
The school hopes to have a June referendum vote instead of November so the district would have lower construction costs by building in the summer and avoid displacing students during the work.
If the plan passes in June 2010, construction plans would be drawn during the winter and bidding would begin in March 2011. Pakulski estimated the proposed project would take 33 months from referendum approval to completion.
The project as proposed would keep the new auditorium and sections of the existing school but add on a larger addition between the present buildings, although committee members noted the plan is still in its preliminary stages.
Staff Writer Suzanne Hodgson can be reached at 282-4337, ext. 233.
Staff Writer
South Portland’s Secondary School Facilities Committee is back with a new outlook, new budget and new plan for a modern high school.
A joint meeting between the council and the school board Tuesday gave the public, council and school board a chance to question the committee on what the high school needs, how a new proposed plan differs from a 2007 plan and why they want to put the question to voters next June.
The issue of the aging building has led to accreditation problems with the New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC), which conducted a 10-year evaluation that included teachers, programs and the facilities.
NEASC identified 17 problems with the building, and in a letter to Principal Jeanne Crocker this April referred to “the serious level of structural decay of the facility.”
The level of structural decay was apparent during a tour Tuesday of the building. Windows are nailed to the building so they won’t fall out the other side; a large crack has formed in one room where the original 1950s building is pulling away from the 1979 addition; and 11 separate levels throughout the three-story building make handicapped access at the current building cumbersome.
Handicapped students and adults use an antiquated elevator system that stops six times as it goes up three stories and opens into a classroom. A different lift in a glass-enclosed room also carries handicapped students to the gym. Crocker says most handicapped students would rather make their way around the outside of the building.
The school does have accreditation, but with a warning.
“Warnings are not abnormal now for schools. Most schools usually have between 60 and 100 recommendations from NEASC,” said Crocker. South Portland High School has 20 recommendations in addition to the building concerns.
If the NEASC recommendations are not addressed five years after the recommendations are made, the school could be put on probation. That might affect students applying to colleges because the accreditation probation would show up on student transcripts, Crocker said.
“Some [colleges] go on history of the high school, some will have grave concern if students come from a high school on probation,” said Crocker.
After the NEASC walk through, voters passed $5.8 million in June to address some health and safety issues to the high school and Mahoney and Memorial Middle Schools. The high school used part of the money to put in a new sprinkler system. Crocker says the money was spent so even if reconstruction of the school does eventually pass, the work done with the money would not be wasted.
A $56 million school was on the ballot in 2007, but voters rejected the plan 3 to 1. The Secondary School Facilities Committee hopes a lower cost will be more appealing to voters. South Portland Superintendent Suzanne Godin says she wants to keep the cost around $40 million, which would include the addition of 76,000 square feet to the existing school.
Dan Robbins, estimator for Harriman Associates, the architects working with the South Portland school project, said many recent construction projects have cost less than projected budgets.
“There has been a drop in development cost due to economy and market, I don’t see it changing,” said Robbins.
Scott Pakulsk,i facilities manager for Harriman Associates, showed how the new proposal would use less room than the previously proposed school by building a two-story gym instead of a larger one-story gym, condensing the new building and not building another turf field.
The school hopes to have a June referendum vote instead of November so the district would have lower construction costs by building in the summer and avoid displacing students during the work.
If the plan passes in June 2010, construction plans would be drawn during the winter and bidding would begin in March 2011. Pakulski estimated the proposed project would take 33 months from referendum approval to completion.
The project as proposed would keep the new auditorium and sections of the existing school but add on a larger addition between the present buildings, although committee members noted the plan is still in its preliminary stages.
Staff Writer Suzanne Hodgson can be reached at 282-4337, ext. 233.
Comments