gloucester county transportation study

Fleet Maintenance Center StudyforGloucester County Public SchoolsHUDSON + ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTSFINAL DRAFT REPORT SUMMARYSchool Board Presentation: February 23, 2017

Page 2

Fleet Maintenance Center Study for Gloucester County Public Schools

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY HISTORY: In early 2016, Gloucester County approached Hudson + Associates Architects about possibility of undertaking a programming study for a new vehicle maintenance and utilities center in conjunction with a master plan for redevelopment of the Old Page Middle School site. The master plan aspect of the Old Page Middle School site was eventually dropped from the scope, and it was agreed that multiple sites would be considered for the new Center. CURRENT SITUATION: Maintenance for current County and School board vehicles and equipment currently takes place in buildings that are generally undersized and poorly suited to all types of vehicles in the respective fleets. Certain major maintenance tasks cannot be performed and must be tasked out to local, private shops. The Sheriff’s Department opted to task all of its vehicle maintenance out to local shops due to shortage of personnel and capabilities to suit its mission-essential needs. Existing facilities are cramped, poorly lit and marginally ventilated. Storage space for spare parts is limited, and the work environment is less-than-pleasant for County personnel. Maintenance is performed in various, scattered buildings. The Utilities Department likewise lacks sufficient maintenance space and has current assets scattered among multiple, marginally-suited buildings and yards. Many County assets such as trailers, and towable equipment (generators, backhoes, mowers, etc.) are stored outside in weather where they deteriorate. While County maintenance personnel are meeting critical needs, they are doing so in facilities that are far less-than-ideal. METHOD OF ANALYSIS: Hudson + Associates Architects undertook the following steps:

Major Tasks: What we looked for: Meetings with key department persons to understand organizational needs

How departments are currently organized; what does each person do?

Meetings with key operational persons to under organization processes

How do personnel interact with each other? With the current facility?

Visits to all existing County maintenance and storage facilities currently in use

What is size, condition and layout of current facilities? Identify deficiencies

Visits to proposed sites within Gloucester County and obtaining local physical and topographical data

Size and proportions of site, elevation above floodplain, access from streets, access to utilities, opportunity to expand

Visits to facilities in other neighboring counties that are similar to the one proposed by this Study

Evaluate comparative size, amenities, functional layout, what works well and signs of potential obsolescence

PROPOSED SOLUTION: This Study contemplates design and construction of a new, consolidated fleet maintenance and utility operations center to suit requirement of the County, Utilities Department, School Board, and Sheriff’s Department. Included will be the following major program elements:

Vehicle maintenance bays (garage) and related shop area

School bus operations office

Utilities Department office for maintainers

Toilets, lockers and showers for maintenance personnel

Page 3

Fleet Maintenance Center Study for Gloucester County Public Schools

Combined spares and parts storage with centralized inventory management

Vehicle wash bay (indoor)

Vehicle fueling island (outdoor, covered) and oil-water separator

Central warehouse storage for Utilities Department and County equipment

Outdoor covered storage for trailers, trailerable equipment and materials

Surface parking for fleet vehicles and personnel’s own vehicles SITES FOR CONSIDERATION: The ideal site will have the following attributes:

Sufficient acreage to suit outdoor parking of the school bus fleet and other County vehicles

Suitable acreage and proportions for optimal workflow of vehicles, parking and fueling

Sufficient area to suit facility footprints, outdoor material storage, and stormwater management

Sufficient area to allow for future expansion of building(s) without adverse impact on assets to remain

Safety and ease of ingress into, and egress from, the site at adjacent roadways

Availability of utilities to support building(s) and site amenities

Good vertical elevation above floodplain, and minimal impact from wetlands

Good soils for bearing pavements and building foundations

Sufficient acreage for future expansion

Three sites were considered:

Old Page Middle School site (off Rt. 17, near current School Transportation Ctr.)

Land adjacent to the T.C Walker Center (off T.C. Walker Road)

Land Adjacent to the new Page Middle School site (off T.C. Walker Road)

The site adjacent to the T.C. Walker Center was ruled out fairly quickly because it was too small and was predominantly at too low a vertical elevation to build upon. Also, to build the facility at this site would constrain future reuse of the T.C. Walker Center as a school, if desired. As for the other two sites:

Old Page Middle School: site is favorable in size and flexibility, but currently lacks ideal access to Route 17. Also, the site’s configuration and current location of the water tower impact the layout and future expansion. The existing School Transportation facility, however, may be re-purposed for use by Utilities Maintenance, reducing need for new construction to suits its needs. Lastly, this site may have higher and beneficial use for economic development.

Land Adjacent to the new Page Middle School: This site is also favorable in size and flexibility, and offers good access to T.C. Walker Road without adverse impact upon traffic flow in and out of the Middle School. Its size and proportions are amenable to efficient use and future expansion. This is a ‘virgin’ site, however, and will incur higher costs to clear to support with new utilities. Also, T.C. Walker Road must be widened to add new turn lanes into the center.

Page 4

Fleet Maintenance Center Study for Gloucester County Public Schools

PROPOSED BUILDING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT COSTS: A

preliminary, estimated budget is included herein that contemplates

construction of the new, consolidated Transportation and Utility Center and

all related site development. A separate estimate is included for each site,

due to the differing conditions and programmatic elements at each site.

Please note that:

The overall figures are for budgeting purposes only, and is not based on definitive design of the building(s) or site amenities.

Additional site investigation, such as geotechnical investigation of soils may be warranted.

The overall figures assume that the primary maintenance garage and warehouse facility will be built using pre-engineered building structure and walls built at least partial height of masonry for durability.

A single-story building is preferred to avoid cost of stairwells and an elevator.

Conceptual building floor plans and overall site plans (one for each site) are offered herein upon which the estimated costs are based. TIMETABLE TO IMPLEMENT: The proposed Transportation and Utility Center can be designed and built as soon as funding is authorized by Gloucester County. Some time constraints to consider include:

Once approved and design is authorized to commence, a detailed survey of the selected site will be required. An updated wetlands delineation may be required, depending upon the selected site and preferred layout. This can take up to 8-10 weeks to accomplish.

Geotechnical investigation will be required to determine foundation and pavement subgrade requirements.

There should be no unusual environmental permitting required; however, up to 90 days should be allowed for County review of the definitive site plan and stormwater management design. This can be expedited as early in the design process as possible to reduce impact on overall timeframe to permit the project.

6-8 months should be allowed for design, which includes the aforementioned civil design and environmental review.

6 weeks should be allowed for bidding.

4 weeks should be allowed for review of bids and determination of an acceptable low bidder. The apparent low bidder should submit its insurance paperwork and performance bond for review prior to award of contract.

Due to the extensive sitework required, 16-18 months should be allowed for construction following award of contract.

Other time factors to consider:

30-60 days should be allowed to equip and furnish the new facility, as well as to set up data and communication systems.

The ideal time to relocate operations and vehicle maintenance to the completed facility, from perspective of schools and bus transportation, is mid-summer. There is no favored time for Utilities or County vehicle maintenance.

There will be some costs to move the operation and maintenance entities into a new facility. It may be advantageous to bring in a company specializing in such moves to shorten the downtime of the various units.

Page 5

OVERVIEW – STUDY OBJECTIVE Assess condition of existing transportation administration and maintenance

facilities

Gain understanding of current and projected (future) operational and maintenance needs by interviewing Schools & County staff

Explore efficiencies gained by consolidating Schools and County fleet maintenance into a single facility. Also explore consolidation with the County Utilities Maintenance Division.

Evaluate and compare up to three (3) sites for locating the consolidated facility at Old Page MS, T.C.Walker Center & next to New Page MS

Prepare a cost model to develop the project for funding purposes

Page 6

CURRENT SITUATION Current facilities are antiquated, undersized and crowded

Buildings no longer suited to size and diversity of vehicles to be maintained

Working conditions are marginal, and poor at County Garage

Several tasks are outsourced that could otherwise be performed

Spare parts often not readily on hand (lack of storage)

Unsheltered vehicles and equipment deteriorate more rapidly

No manpower or capacity to maintain Sheriff ’s vehicles

Inefficient use of manpower due to shortage of personnel

Page 7

36’L Bus in Maint. BayAerial View – Schools Transportation Center

Front of Building

Page 8

County Garage at Rt. 17 & Providence Rd.

Page 9

Carriage Lane County & Utility Maint. Dept. Facilities

COUNTY MAINTENANCE SHED (SHELTER LOCATED BEHIND TO LEFT)

UTILITIES MAINTENANCE UNIT BUILDING

UTILITIES DEPARTMENT ADMIN. &CUSTOMER SERVICE CENTER Utility Dept. Maint. Yard &

Facilities behind Southern StatesPage 10

ADDITIONAL CHALLENGES Current buildings cannot be enlarged; poor value to enhance

Equipment storage scattered in various locations

County & Utilities: Shortage of maintenance & warehouse area

Utilities “Yard” behind Southern States – buildings in poor condition

Conditions adversely affect workflow, response & timely completion

Excess employee time spent traveling between tasks & sites

Longevity of vehicle & equipment assets is reduced

Conditions not condusive to employee satisfaction or longevity

Page 11

NEW FACILITY OBJECTIVES Consolidate Schools & County fleet maintenance functions

Modernize facilities that improve workflow and operational efficiency

Increase storage capacity and maintenance capabilities

Improve conditions for multiple County organizations under one project

Enhance maintenance and extend life of vehicles & equipment

Provide site layout that is spacious enough for larger, consolidated operation, yet is efficient and cost-effective

Site & building should have some initial growth capacity built-in

Site must support opportunity to expand to suit longterm needs

Page 12

FLEET MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTSPUBLIC COUNTY & SHERIFF’S

SCHOOLS UTILITIES DEPT. TOTALSClass 1 Passenger 49 45 72 166Class 2 Trucks 34 29 9 72Class 3 Buses 112 * -- -- 112Class 4 Trailers 8 17 3 ** 28Class 5 Equipment 6 31 -- 37TOTAL Vehicles 195 74 81 350

All Items 209 122 84 415* 4 inspections/bus/year = 448 total inspections/year** Includes Tactical Command Center

Page 13

TRANSPORTATION FACILITY PROGRAMGARAGE: Maintenance Bays (7 double bays X 20’ wide x 110’ deep) 15,400 SF Parts Warehouse 3,100 SF Supervisor Office/Records/Break Area 800 SF Lockers/Toilets 1,000 SF Machine Shop/Batteries 1,500 SF

Sub-total, Garage 21,800 SFTRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION OFFICE: 2,400 SFCommon Area/Circulation: 1,200 SF

Sub-Total, Transportation 25,400 SF

Page 14

TRANSPORTATION FACILITY PROGRAMTRANSPORTATION PROGRAM: 25,400 SF

ADDITIONAL BUILDING PROGRAM: Equipment Maintenance Center (Off-road, mowers, tools) 1,750 SF

Total New Building Area, Old Page Site 27,150 SF

Utilities Maintenance Division (Office/Lockers/Shop) 1,900 SFTotal New Building Area, New Page Site 29,050 SF

Page 15

TRANSPORTATION FACILITY PROGRAMUTILITIES MAINTENANCE DIVISION: At the New Page site, Utilities Maintenance Division will have its offices and a

maintenance shop in the main, new building (totaling 1,900 SF) , sharing toilets and other amenities with the Transportation/Garage functions.

In addition, Utilities Maint. Div. will have a new 7,500 SF storage warehouse. Also, there will be another 7,500 SF of new outdoor covered shed area.

At the Old Page site, Utilities Maintenance Division will re-occupy the existing, vacated Transportation office & garage, totaling 7,500 SF.

The existing building will require minor alterations and some renovations, including a new roof. Also, there will be another 10,000 SF of new outdoor covered

shed area.

Page 16

TransportationAdministration

Consolidated Vehicle Maint.

Utilities Maint.Division

Equipment Maintenance

Shared

MAINT. BAYS

UTIL.MAINT.DIV.

MACHINE SHOP

PARTS WA

SH

BAY

BRAKES

TIRES

EQUIP. MAINT.

TRA

NSP

ORT

’N A

DM

IN.

UTILITIES MAINT. DIVISION OFFICES & SHOP INCLUDED

FOR NEW PAGE SITE

Page 17

TransportationAdministration

Consolidated Vehicle Maint.

Equipment Maintenance

SharedMAINT. BAYS

MACHINE SHOP

PARTS

WA

SH

BAY

BRAKES

TIRES

EQUIP. MAINT.

TRA

NSP

ORT

’N A

DM

IN.

ALTERNATE BUILDING PLAN – REDUCED SIZE (OMITS

UTILITIES MAINT DIV.)FOR OLD PAGE SITE

Page 18

FLEET MAINTENANCE – WHY 14 BAYS?

BUS 1

WA

SH B

AY

BRAKES

TIRESHOP

TRUC

K 1PASS

1

BUS 2

BUS 3

BUS 4

BUS 5

BUS 6

FLUIDS

PASS 3

PASS 2

TRUC

K 1

Bays can also “flex” as needed, depending on workload

Trailers require less time in shop, but are typicallypulledthrough

One bay for “long-term” work on buses (#6)

Page 19

OLD PAGE MIDDLE SCHOOL SITE: Adequate acreage for larger, consolidated Transportation/County Garage Could support future expansion for Transportation & County Garage Site impacted somewhat by existing water tower & wetlands Existing transportation facility would not be affected by new construction Could locate at rear of site; preserve front of site for alternative use Access to Rt. 17 less than optimal, but could improve in future Utilities Maintenance Division is accommodated at existing Bus

Maint./Garage/Transportation Office, plus new Storage ShedsReconfigured site and reused existing entrance drive at

north side of site; access on/off Rt. 17 is questionable Developed acreage & amenities now similar to New Page site

Page 20

T.C. WALKER ROADEXISTING

SCHOOLS TRANSPORTATION OFFICE/MAINT. CTR.

Page 21

T.C.WALKER ROAD

EXISTING SCHOOLS TRANSPORTATION OFFICE/MAINT. CTR. – UTILITIES MAINT. DIV.

EXISTING WATER TOWER

OLD PAGE SITE PLAN – Updated 2/23/170 100’ 400’

Page 22

T.C.WALKER ROAD

FUTURE ENTRY ROAD

EXISTING WATER TOWER

OLD PAGE SITE PLAN – Updated 2/23/170 100’ 400’

FUTURE EXPANSION

Page 23

NEW PAGE SCHOOL SITE: Adequate acreage for larger, consolidated Transportation/County Garage Could support future expansion Site minimally impacted by wetlands Access to T.C. Walker Road is optimal Can locate without impact to existing Middle School Preserves acreage for only one future school, but not two Utilities Maintenance Division is housed in new building with

Transporation; site also includes new Warehouse and Storage Sheds Add turn lanes off T.C. Walker Road

Page 24

T.C. WALKER ROAD

EXISTING PAGE MIDDLE SCHOOL

Page 25

T.C. WALKER ROAD (WIDENED)

EXISTING PAGE MIDDLESCHOOL

NEW PAGE SITE PLAN – Updated 2/23/170 100’ 400’

Page 26

T.C. WALKER ROAD (WIDENED)

EXISTING PAGE MIDDLESCHOOL

NEW PAGE SITE PLAN – Updated 2/23/170 100’ 400’

FUTURE EXPANSION

Page 27

T.C. WALKER CENTER SITE Limited acreage for a large, consolidated operations; impedes expansion Much of the site is at lower grade than existing Center Stream and wetlands impacts prevent full use of site Might limit future growth of T.C. Walker Center or return to use a school Access to T.C. Walker Road less than optimal, but workable Constraints to site layout and flow of traffic due to grade change Site cannot accommodate Utilities Maintenance Division Insufficient land at upper elevation to park all buses Soils might not be favorable to spread-footing foundations Potential impacts on existing Center during construction School Board determined this site is no longer to be considered

Page 28

EXISTING T.C. WALKER CENTER

T.C. WALKER ROAD

30’60’70’ 40’

25’20’

50’

Page 29

EXISTING T.C. WALKER CENTER

T.C. WALKER ROAD

Page 30

PROJECT COST ESTIMATE / COMPARISONBUILDING COSTS OLD PAGE Site NEW PAGE Site Industrial Space (~$110/SF) $ 2,392,500 $ 2,442,000 Office/Finished Space (~$175/SF) 945,000 1,198,750

Sub-Total, Primary Building $ 3,337,500 $ 3,640,750 Utilities Maint. Div. Warehouse -- 500,000 Re-Purpose Existing Transport’n Bldg. 112,500 -- Re-Roof Existing Transport’n Bldg. 93,750 -- Outdoor Covered Storage Shelter(s) 200,000 150,000 Furnishings & Equipment 380,250 401,500

Sub-Total, Building Costs $ 4,124,000 $ 4,692,250

Page 31

PROJECT COST ESTIMATE / COMPARISONSITEWORK COSTS OLD PAGE Site NEW PAGE Site Site Improvements $ 900,750 $ 1,567,600 Grading & Drainage 220,350 265,975 Utilities – Water/Sewer/Fuels 164,650 394,250 Utilities - Electrical 240,000 381,000

Sub-Total, Sitework Costs $ 1,525,600 $ 2,608,825w/Building Cost, Rounded 5,650,000 7,301,000With Contingency (+10%) 6,215,000 8,031,000Design + Engineering 497,000 642,000Estimated Total Project Cost $ 6,712,000 $ 8,673,000Site acreage 16.14 acres 16.39 acresSitework, Cost/acre $ 94,532/acre $ 159,172/acre

Page 32

GLOUCESTER COUNTY TRANSPORTATION CENTER STUDYCOST ESTIMATE FEBRUARY 23, 2017 QTY. $/UNIT COST QTY. $/UNIT COST

BUILDING COSTSMAIN BUILDING SF

INDUSTRIAL SPACE SF 21,750 110.00 2,392,500 22,200 110.00 2,442,000 49,500 OFFICE/FINISHED SPACE SF 5,400 175.00 945,000 6,850 175.00 1,198,750 253,750

SUB-TOTAL, PRIMARY BUILDING SF 27,150 3,337,500 29,050 3,640,750 303,250 UTILITIES MAINT. DIV. - WAREHOUSE (NEW PAGE) SF - 10,000 50.00 500,000 500,000 RE-PURPOSE EXISTING TRANSPORT'N BLDG (OLD PAGE) SF 7,500 15.00 112,500 - (112,500) RE-ROOF EXISTING TRANSPORT'N BLDG (OLD PAGE) SF 7,500 12.50 93,750 (93,750) OUTDOOR COVERED STORAGE SHELTER(S) SF 10,000 20.00 200,000 7,500 20.00 150,000 (50,000) FURNISHINGS & EQUIPMENT LS 380,250 401,500 21,250

SUB-TOTAL, BUILDING COSTS 4,124,000$ 4,692,250$ 568,250$

SITEWORKSITE IMPROVEMENTS

IMPROVE T.C. WALKER ROAD LF - 1,800 225 405,000 405,000 ADD TURN LANE ON RT.17 LF 300 225 67,500 - (67,500) SITE CLEARING AC 2.00 20,000 40,000 16.39 20,000 327,800 287,800 SITE DEMOLITION/PAVEMENT REMOVAL SF 38,000 - - - EARTHWORK CY 18,150 5.00 90,750 26,460 5.00 132,300 41,550 CANOPY AT FUEL ISLAND SF 2,000 15.00 30,000 2,000 15.00 30,000 - NEW PAVEMENT - FLEXIBLE SY 48,500 10.00 485,000 48,500 10.00 485,000 - NEW PAVEMENT - RIGID SY 2,800 25.00 70,000 2,800 25.00 70,000 - TURF/LANDSCAPING AC 3 25,000 75,000 3 25,000 75,000 - FENCING LF 3,150 - 3,150 - - GATES EA 2 15,000 30,000 2 15,000 30,000 - SIGNAGE LS -- 5,000 5,000 - SIDEWALK/EQUIPMENT PADS LS -- 7,500 7,500 -

GRADING & DRAINAGE - BMP/RETENTION POND CY 6,000 15.00 90,000 9,000 15.00 135,000 45,000 CURB & GUTTER LF 3,000 7.50 22,500 3,000 7.50 22,500 - DRAINAGE STRUCTURES EA 5 7,500 37,500 5 7,500 37,500 - UNDERGROUND PIPING LF 1,000 30.00 30,000 1,000 30.00 30,000 - EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL AC 16.14 2,500 40,350 16.39 2,500 40,975 625

OLD PAGE SITE NEW PAGE SITEUNITS Δ

Page 33

GLOUCESTER COUNTY TRANSPORTATION CENTER STUDYCOST ESTIMATE FEBRUARY 23, 2017 QTY. $/UNIT COST QTY. $/UNIT COST

OLD PAGE SITE NEW PAGE SITEUNITS Δ

UTILITIESWATER/SEWER/FUELS

EXTEND WATER SERVICE, 8-INCH LF 600 64 38,400 -- - (38,400) EXTEND WATER SERVICE, 16-INCH LF -- - 1,500 125 187,500 187,500 SANITARY SEWER - GRAVITY, 8-INCH LF 600 40 24,000 1,500 40 60,000 36,000 S.S. MANHOLE EA 1 20,000 20,000 2 20,000 40,000 20,000 S.S. GRINDER PUMP/LIFT STATION EA -- - 1 15,000 15,000 15,000 DOMESTIC WATER LINE, 3-INCH LF 250 30 7,500 350 30 10,500 3,000 SPRINKLER WATER LINE, 6-INCH LF 250 65 16,250 350 65 22,750 6,500 FIRE HYDRANTS EA 2 3,000 6,000 2 3,000 6,000 - BACKFLOW PREVENTER EA 1 5,000 5,000 1 5,000 5,000 - PROPANE GAS SERVICE & PAD LS -- 7,500 -- 7,500 - RELOCATE FUEL ISLAND LS -- 10,000 -- 10,000 - OIL-WATER SEPARATOR, FUEL PAD (20,000 GAL) EA 1 25,000 25,000 1 25,000 25,000 - OIL-WATER SEPARATOR, BUILDING (1,500 GAL) EA 1 5,000 5,000 1 5,000 5,000 -

ELECTRICAL - POWER TO BUILDING, AERIAL LF -- - 1,500 30 45,000 45,000 POWER TO BUILDING, BURIED, DUCTBANK LS -- 50,000 -- 50,000 - TRANSFORMER EA 1 20,000 20,000 2 18,000 36,000 16,000 STANDBY GENERATOR, DIESEL, 150 KW EA 1 45,000 45,000 1 45,000 45,000 - TELECOMMUNICATIONS LS -- 75,000 -- 155,000 80,000 SITE LIGHTING - POLES EA 20 2,500 50,000 20 2,500 50,000 -

SUB-TOTAL, SITEWORK COSTS 1,525,750$ 2,608,825$ 1,083,075$ SITE ACREAGE 16.14 16.39 0

SITEWORK COST / ACRE 94,532$ 159,172$ 64,640$ -

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS, ESTIMATED 5,649,750$ 7,301,075$ 1,651,325$ TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS, ROUNDED 5,650,000 7,301,000 1,651,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS, W/CONTINGENCY (+10%) 6,215,000 8,031,000 1,816,000 DESIGN + ENGINEERING 497,000 642,000 145,000 ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST 6,712,000$ 8,673,000$ 1,961,000$

Page 34

SITES – COMPARATIVE DISCUSSIONOld Page

School site

New PageSchool site

Lesser cost to develop; minimal clearing and grading required Utilities already on (or near) site that appear adequate, including fueling Access to Route 17 remains configured as-is today – not ideal, but adequate Improving access to Rt. 17 not essential; but could be quite costly Re-utilizes existing Transportation office/garage; well-suited to Utilities

Maintenance Division needs Portion of existing site remains undeveloped – available for future expansion

Higher cost to develop Relatively high site costs for clearing, earthwork and grading, new utilities Higher cost to build 100% new space for Utilities Maintenance Division Good access off T.C. Walker Road for optimized ingress/egress; but must

widen T.C. Walker Road with new turn lanesMore flexible site arrangement & internal movement than Old Page Building at New Page site allows alternative use at Old Page site;

land used for this project is no longer available for a future schoolPage 35

SITES – “BOTTOM LINE” COMPARISON

Old PageSchool site

New PageSchool site

Lower cost to redevelopAccess to Route 17, if unchanged, remains adequate but less than

ideal, and can present safety challenges for left-turning traffic exiting the site

Re-purposes the existing School Transportation office & garage for use by Utilities Maintenance Division

Higher cost to develop (nearly $2 million delta)Ideal access off T.C. Walker Road; safe ingress/egressBuilding at New Page site allows alternative use at Old Page site

Page 36

COMMENTS RECEIVED & RESPONSES Incorporate Mosquito Control Vehicle Parking The Mosquito Control vehicles (2) and its chemical storage/handling area

will be located inside the Warehouse with Utilities Maintenance, partitioned off separately from other functions. At the Old Page site, this amounts to one bay of the existing Schools Transportation Building.

Recommend extending 8-inch water lines into site in order to include fire sprinklers at the buildings and support new fire hydrantsSprinklers will be required at the main Admin./Garage building, but will

likely not be required at the Warehouse due to its size and function. New fire hydrants will be required at either site, and the cost estimate will be increased to include more 8-inch water piping.

Page 37

COMMENTS RECEIVED & RESPONSES Consider reducing the number of buses that need to be stored on the

site to 160; and consolidate the buses in such a manner that, when all parked on the site, they occupy as minimal a footprint as necessary, to reduce acreage developed and new impervious surface.Will do. There may be reduction of impervious area by as much as 15,000-

30,000 SF, resulting in minor cost savings at both sites for new pavement, earthwork/grading, and stormwater treatment.

Revisit the estimated cost for sanitary sewer force main extension at the New Page Site. Will do. Additional cost (minor) for a new force main to the New Page Middle

School pump station will be included. Will discuss further with Utilities ifUpgrade to the School pump station and/or force main beyond is needed. Thesewer discharge rate can be reduced with a holding tank at the New Page site.

Page 38

architectureinterior design

planningRICHARD S. CORNER, AIA, CSI

SENIOR PARTNERKEITH MUSHENSKI, AIAA

PARTNER

120 WEST QUEENS WAY, #201HAMPTON, VA 23669

757 • 722 • 1964www.hudsonarch.com

Page 39