LEW-PORT: Confusion over $28M project grows

<table width="234" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" background="http://static.cnhi.zope.net/flashpromo/niagaragazette/images/byline_234x60.jpg" height="60"><tr><td><div align="center"><font size="3" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">By Caitlin Murray</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></font><font size="1" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="mailto:murrayc@gnnewspaper.com">murrayc@gnnewspaper.com</a></font></div></td></tr></table>
Niagara Gazette

December 01, 2008 10:33 pm

— A work session Monday with the architects spearheading Lewiston-Porter’s $28 million capital project left the Board of Education with more questions than answers.
Superintendent Christopher Roser had arranged the special meeting with hopes the board could reach a consensus as to what should be trimmed from the project, but no such decision will come anytime soon.
SWBR Architects, the contractors leading the project, presented the board a list of nearly 200 components that would make up the second phase of the project. But still confused about the project components, the board opted to send SWBR back to work, developing a more detailed list that would explain which design elements were necessary and which were not.
Among the problems with the list, Roser pointed out a leaking roof at the primary building was not even included as a possible component. The 2006 school board had approved both phases of the $28 capital projects, which did not address roof repairs. Board member Ed Lilly sat on the board at the time, but said he was not a part of that decision.
“The board decided four baseball diamonds was more of a priority than a leaking roof,” Lilly said. “A roof isn’t exciting.”
Buildings and Grounds Superintendent David Quattrini said leaking has also appeared at the Intermediate and Community Education centers.
Roser directed SWBR to provide a cost estimate for roof repairs. To be added to the scope of the project, the district would have to pay SWBR for designs and then send plans to the state Education Department for approval, which can take up to 25 weeks.
Board member Keith Fox suggested the project could be done in two parts — one this summer and a second next year.
The board also criticized the list as being unclear as to which items were mandated by the state for safety and handicapped accessibility and which were aesthetic in nature. Vice president Edward Waller added it wasn’t indicated which items had to be implemented together, making it impossible to go down the list and cut.
Roser looked at the list and expressed concern important components had been deleted from the scope of the project, such as some HVAC work. Buildings and Grounds Superintendent David Quattrini added he had been promised some ventilation elements would be included.
SWBR will return to the board’s Dec. 16 meeting with a new list.
Since first phase ran about $3 million over budget, the district is left just $8 million to spend. All of the nearly 200 items equal roughly $18 million, meaning the board has tough decisions in what elements should be cut.
“We’re not talking about using a scalpel here, we need a chainsaw to go from $18 million to $8 million,” said board president Robert Weller.
Roser, who began as superintendent in October, said he was surprised the capital project hadn’t been planned more carefully but said he believed the final scope of phase two should be ready for work to begin by this summer.