Board Examines Phased Renovation of Greenacres and Financing Options

Questions about the future of Greenacres and the amount of the May 2017 bond grew more complex at the Scarsdale School Board meeting on the morning of May 4. As one commenter suggested, the Board and Administration will need to use their critical thinking skills to balance the needs at Greenacres Elementary School and overall district facilities needs with financial realities.

Assistant Superintendent Stuart Mattey presented the following two charts showing how much the district could raise without raising taxes, and another chart showing the net cost to the district for various building options at terms of 15 to 30 years.

Mattey explained that the formulations in the top chart took the following factors into account:

Building aid from NYS: A complex formula including base aid ratio
Bond percent: The amount of the bond that is aid eligible
Aid per building: The calculated maximum aid per building
Interest rates: Based on the state's average interest rate

Furthermore, he explained that the payment of state aid, which is "20 cents on the dollar," commences 18 months after a project is filed with the state, and is paid back over a set number of years, depending on the type of project, with the state favoring renovations over new constructions. Payback periods are as follows:

• Renovations: 15 years
• Additions: 20 years
• New building: 30 years

In reviewing the options, Mattey and Superintendent Hagerman said that the options shaded in green – or the 15-year financing options for renovations and the 30-year option for the new school – made the most sense for the district. They said it is customary to pay off renovation projects before they became obsolete. You can review the entire presentation here.

Following Mattey's explanation of financing options, Architect Russ Davidson of KD&D presented an option for renovating the school in two phases. Previously the focus had been on whether to build a new school across the street or renovate and enlarge the existing school. At this latest session, the conversation turned exclusively to renovation options as the Board had received little support for Option C, which was to build a new school on the field across the street.

At the May 4th board meeting Russ Davidson presented a plan to split Option B1 into two phases, one to occur after the passage of the bond in May 2017, and the other to occur nine to ten years later. He also explained that due to a cost analysis error, the cost of Option B1 had dropped around $3 million. Phase One would consist of heavy renovations, including:

The addition of 6 new classrooms; 3 on the first floor and 3 on the second floor facing the Huntington Road side.

Reconfiguring the K-2 classrooms to meet the model program classroom requirements and to including a new HVAC system with air conditioning.

Reconfiguration of existing offices and small group rooms to create full-sized rooms and new student bathrooms.

Expansion of the current computer classroom.

Reconfiguration of the multi-story area opposite of the gymnasium on both levels to create 3 larger rooms where 4 smaller rooms now exist.

The plan proposes that all of the classrooms and common learning spaces will have central air conditioning, with the new HVAC machinery located in the basement. The reconfiguration of the upper level will also include the creation of new student bathrooms.

Phase One would not include changes or replacements to the current windows or roof, which were both deemed adequate by the building committees, but will need to be replaced in ten years as part of Phase Two. Phase Two improvements would also update the rooms to include ceiling improvements, interior finishes, millwork replacements, new interior doors.

According to Davidson's estimates, Phase One is projected to cost, $31.8 million while Phase Two at $8 million, for a total of $39,822,497. In contrast, the architects had previously stated that Option C to build an entirely new school would cost $53.96 million.

When asked about revamping the wiring and data systems already installed in the school, Davidson explained that the B1 proposal would attempt to leave the existing wiring, for security and data systems in place, saying they were both adequate.

In the conversation that followed, Dr. Hagerman asked why the windows, roof and data wiring would not be replaced in Phase 1, saying, "Does it make sense to do this work and not do the roof and not do data? We area touching every part of the building."

Several Board members questioned whether it would be safe to put the HVAC mechanical systems in the basement of the school, which was previously reported to be damp and moldy.

Davidson explained that previous iterations of the plan had sited the air conditioning handlers in new dormers in the attic of the building. He now believes that there are dry areas of the basement where the equipment can be placed. He said the HVAC systems was closed, there would be no impact on the air quality and would provide "the same quantity of fresh air per student."

The board also discussed whether they favored air conditioning the entire school, including the classrooms, when this has not been done in the other elementary school classrooms. Davidson said about his other projects, saying, "We are air conditioning more than we are not.... the tide is turning on air conditioning in the region."

Board member Suzanne Seiden asked that the Board to consider the core principles behind their decision at the next meeting; i.e. no tax increase and that the priority should be Greenacres.

The conversation concluded with Board President Lee Maude saying, "So tonight we learned that our potential project size is significantly lower than we thought and got information on B1 and B2. Do we want to think about a more additive B1?" She asked Board members to give her feedback and said the issue would continue to be discussed at the Board's May 16 meeting.