Bedford Central School District building projects taking shape

By JEFF MORRIS 

Representatives of BBS Architects and Arris Contracting updated the Board of Education on the district’s construction bond projects at the Sept. 9 meeting. The overview of facilities culminated in a real-time discussion of facilities, as the board decided not to move ahead with the purchase of enhanced port-a-potties.

Completion of Phase 2

In a slide show, before and after photos were shown of multiple portions of the Fox Lane High School and Fox Lane Middle School buildings. They highlighted work that had been completed at the two schools under Phase 2 of the bond project.

At the high school, areas shown included the large cafeteria, serving space and small cafeteria, library, guidance suite, common space, fitness center, boys and girls locker rooms, and extensive work that was done in the corridors.

At the middle school, work was completed in the main lobby, main office, nurse’s office, music suite, and STEAM classrooms.

The images were somewhat distorted, and board member Steven Matlin commented “the pictures don’t really do it justice, especially in the high school; the transformation is just tremendous, and it’s been incredibly well received by the students and the faculty.”

Matlin said, as someone who has served on the construction committee, “we brought this in on time and under budget, which doesn’t happen in a lot of these types of projects,” and that kids in the district will benefit for years to come for all the work. He noted it was always planned as a four-year project that was approved and supported by the community, and thanked BBS and Arris for all their hard work.

Additional items

As of July 21, the latest numbers available from the district, there was a $1,476,054 surplus remaining in the budget. That total was enumerated in a list of items that came in either over or under budget.

According to Arris, change orders, which were for additional expenses that arose during construction, came in at 2.22% of the total budget, which was said to be right within expectations; the industry standard, noted Superintendent Robert Glass, is between 2.5 and 3%. The total of change orders was $1,141,151, out of revised contracts that totaled $51,383,470. Most of those were for unforeseen conditions at the high school and middle school, the majority of which occurred late in the project, which is why there was a flurry of change orders during Phase 2.

Unforeseen conditions at FLHS and FLMS amounted to $383,479, or 34% of the change orders, with much of the work involving asbestos abatement, after asbestos was discovered buried in the walls and floors. There was also an enormous amount of bad flooring and concrete that needed to be replaced, according to Arris, along with deteriorated steel that was found within the floor and walls, and a great deal of rock that was found in the middle school entranceway.

Porta-potty debate

A major part of the board’s discussion dealt with open items remaining in the bond construction budget. A $200,000 line was for permanent field restrooms, which Matlin said were originally slated for between fields 3 and 4, and by the softball field in back of the middle school. He said due to rock and other conditions, the construction costs came in considerably over budget, and the board instead decided to allocate $100,000 each to purchase what he called “nicer permanent porta-potties” such as might be found at a wedding or other big event. 

Matlin said the construction committee, after considering that after buying these larger units they would still have to be cleaned and serviced, recommended against purchasing them. Glass noted there were also security concerns, with the need to keep them locked after hours. He also said there were new permanent bathrooms in the administration building that could be accessed from the fields, and Matlin said they could still rent standard porta-potties, which could be serviced more often, and the expense would come out of the maintenance budget.

Board President Gilian Klein expressed concern about a possible perception of inequity in having new permanent bathrooms in some locations, while the athletic fields were relying on porta-potties. Matlin emphasized that the board needed to make a decision about whether to leave the $200,000 in the budget, along with other items they have pushed off to the end, “because we need to wrap this project up.”

Matlin pointed out that the $1.4 million remaining could cover the costs of repairs to the gym floor, or could be used for other priorities if the gym cost came in under that amount. Input from Arris indicated engineering analyses being done of the gym floor would not be complete until around Thanksgiving, meaning the cost of that project would not be known until then.

After considerable discussion, including looking into the possibility of increasing the frequency of maintenance of regular porta-potties, the board voted to not move ahead with the $200,000 expenditure for nicer porta-potties.