School board tells architect to trim another $5 million.
By: Jeff Milgram
Members of the Princeton Regional Board of Education are telling their architect, The Hillier Group, to come up with at least $5 million more in cost-saving cuts to the plans for construction at Princeton High School.
"We need to do more redesigning," said Anne Burns, the board’s vice president and chairwoman of the Facilities Committee. "We need not possible solutions, but definite solutions."
Ms. Burns said, "We thought we needed $5 million more in new cuts and told Hillier. Whether they think we need them is another matter."
On Tuesday afternoon, Hillier architects presented the board with redrawn plans for PHS they said will cut $15.4 million from the project, bring it in under budget and attract more general contractors.
"The board is not going to vote on a concept on Tuesday," Ms. Burns said on Wednesday. "We’re on the right path."
Ms. Burns said the board was not comfortable with some of the ideas suggested by Hillier, specifically a plan to use the $2 million in additional state aid the district was notified in September that it would receive. Ms. Burns said the board’s lawyer, David Carroll, said the district could not use the money to spend more than the $81.3 million approved by voters in May 2001.
Ms. Burns said the board will vote to award contracts for the four elementary schools Tuesday.
The Hillier presentation was made during a special board meeting. Not everyone in the audience at the Valley Road Building liked some of the cost-cutting measures, especially a recommendation to install air conditioning in only the administrative offices, the cafeteria and the auditorium, a measure that will save $2 million.
The design changes also were criticized for crowding soccer fields too close to each other and placing special education classes in a remote part of the school.
The architects believe the redesign which cuts the amount of demolition work, increases the amount of renovation and reduces the construction schedule by more than a year will save $8 million.
Another $7.4 million in savings would come from cutting back on items such as air conditioning in renovated classrooms. Other savings would come from bundling the John Witherspoon and PHS bid packages, letting contractors carry less insurance and keeping the computer infrastructure in the existing administrative wing.
This is where the board is skeptical. "We don’t think that this added up to $7 million," Ms. Burns said.
The board also is studying how it can use the $2 million in additional state aid it received for the project.
Only one general contractor bid on the John Witherspoon Middle School and PHS projects. The John Witherspoon bids came in about $1 million over budget and the PHS bids were $13 million over budget.
Hillier project manager Paul Pezzutti said combining both schools in one bid package would save $1.5 million and make the project "more attractive to bigger contractors."
J. Robert Hillier, principal of the architectural firm that drew up the designs and bid packages, opened the presentation with an apology.
"Needless to say, we feel very badly about the way the bids came in," Mr. Hillier said. He later admitted that the original cost estimates were "optimistic."
Mr. Hillier said the three-year construction schedule discouraged builders from bidding on the project.
The architects presented the board with five options that require less demolition and less new construction than the original design.
"At the end, it’s still going to be a great building,’ said George Luaces, the chief designer.
By placing most of the new construction on the Walnut Lane side of the school, the work can be completed in one phase, he said.
The options vary slightly. Several place a new gym next to the proposed performing arts center on the land that was to be used for tennis courts. The new gym would be built on a slab and would not require costly and time-consuming excavation, Mr. Luaces said.
An aerobics and weight room would be placed in one of the two existing gyms, which are being retained.
"From a functional perspective, it’s actually an improvement," Mr. Luaces said.
Ms. Burns said she likes the idea of the new gym, but not its location, next to the performing arts center. "I’m not sure that’s the right spot for the gym," she said.
Several of the options partially eliminate a courtyard that was designed to be the hub of the refurbished school.
"None of these schemes loses any instructional space," Mr. Luaces said. The number of parking spaces will remain the same as in the original design.
He said the options satisfy the district’s Long Range Facilities Plan, which the board submitted to the state.
The architects are asking the board to approve one of the options at a special meeting Tuesday. The plans will have to be submitted to the state for review of how the redesign affects the school’s educational program.
"We do not foresee any problem with that," Mr. Luaces said.
"The firm and our resources are committed to getting this done," Mr. Luaces said.
The plans also may have to be submitted to the state Department of Community Affairs to determine if they meet building codes.
Kathy Tartaglia of Epic Management Inc., the district’s construction management firm, said the pre-construction schedule is "too aggressive." Board member Michael Mostoller, an architect, said the board will have no control over how long such reviews will take.
The schedule calls for bids to go out early in April, with contracts to be awarded a month later. Construction would start in June and be complete in August 2004.
"By reducing the construction period we’ll save money and that will translate into a better bid price," Mr. Luaces said.
Under the original schedule, construction was to begin in September 2002 and be completed in September 2005.
David Carroll, the board’s attorney, said, "The board is between a rock and a hard place." But, he said, the redesigns provided real savings.
"It seems to me that there are some real savings being made by these redesigns," Mr. Carroll said. "There is a significant chance that they will increase competition, which was the primary problem. But as we’ve already learned, estimates are just that. The only things that count are the bids that come in."
He said the schedule that calls for bids to go out in April is "overly optimistic."
The cost savings, especially the plan to air-condition only the new construction and certain areas of the existing building, came under criticism.
"I would not like to see any instructional spaces without air conditioning," said Nancy Schreiber, one of three co-presidents of the Princeton Regional Education Association.
Mr. Luaces said the district could save money by using unit room ventilators, which do not require costly ductwork, to cool classrooms.
The location of special education classrooms away from the center of the building also came under fire.
"We have a proud tradition here in Princeton of inclusion within the community," said Jane Sheehan, president of the district’s Special Education PTO. "To isolate special education groups is not unlike letting someone on the bus and then telling them that they have to sit at the back."
Brooke Vieten, a parent, said, "Taking away more field space is unacceptable."
Board member Alan Hegedus said, "The financial projections strain our credibility." He urged the board to rethink the scope of the performing arts center.
"I’m not sure whether the money spent on the performing arts center wouldn’t be better spent on air conditioning," Mr. Hegedus said.
Board member Joshua Leinsdorf stunned the room by suggesting the board ask voters for more money to complete the project as originally drawn.
"There’s still a possibility that none of these plans will come in under budget.
"This community has gotten used to a very low school-tax rate,’ Mr. Leinsdorf said. He projected that the additional money would add only 3 or 4 cents to the school-tax rate.
Board member Myra Williams rejected the idea. "This plan meets all the requirements," she said. ‘I like this plan better than the original."

