— by Margie Doyle —
At a special meeting of the Orcas Island School District (OISD) Board of Directors on Monday, Feb. 10, the board turned an emphatic “thumbs down” on designs to make the 1,665 square foot modular building a permanent structure.
The board balked at the $275,000 price tag presented to them. OISD acquired the modular building last summer and has been awaiting county permits and construction bids before going ahead and installing the building on campus.
Factors jacking up the anticipated $100,000 cost were the design and mechanics of installing a sprinkler system, interior walls and bathrooms required if the building were to house classrooms. Liz LeRoy, project manager for the school bond construction project, explained by phone to the board that such features would require work by “all the trades but without the economies of scale.”
Late last fall, San Juan County notified the School District design team that the building would be considered a permanent building. In December, island and mainland contractors were asked to bid on the small works project. Two firms bid on the project: Bayley Construction at a cost of $162,663; and Pearson Construction, at a cost of $225,000. Other costs include $38,000 for the move from the University of Washington in Seattle; $12,000 design for Mahlum Architects and $3,000 for permitting.
OISD Board Chair Scott Lancaster opened the conversation with LeRoy saying “We’re flabbergasted,” at the price tag.
LeRoy said that going ahead with the plan and using Pearson as the contractor, because its bid was more thorough, would add “huge value to the district.” However, she cautioned that the costs of locating and connecting utilities were still unknown. She added, “We can’t minimize the staff flexibility in finding temporary spaces for four months.”
After some discussion, OISD Board Member Chris Sutton said he’d suggest “pulling the plug” on siting and upgrading the two-year old modular building and “spend [those costs] on the Choral Room.”
The board asked LeRoy to determine the costs for simply pouring an asphalt slab, or using the one behind the elementary school, and setting the building in place “as is.” They also asked her to determine what uses are considered “triggers” in the County deciding that a building is permanent.
The board tasked OISD Business Manager Keith Whitaker to explore other rental possibilities for classroom use, given that it appears the modular building may only be used for offices or storage space. The board pointed out that using the building only for offices could “free up” other spaces on campus, for example the OASIS space, which currently is about 600 square feet and is planned for 800 square feet.
Lancaster suggested that another site for placement of the modular building may reduce costs, and LeRoy agreed, saying that part of the high price tag included grading the site proposed — behind the “old gym” — and locating utilities connections.
Lancaster also said, “We want to be sure we have better communication going forward.” OISD Board Member Janet Brownell asked that the project management inform the board directly of cost and logistics changes.
This is very worrisome.
The major campus overhaul is in the process of bidding currently and the entire long term use plan and phased schedule is contingent on the use of this building as a classroom.
It would seem that it is time to put the brakes on and do a re analysis of space allocation. If the modular can be used as an office, why not then let it serve as administrative space and scrap the plan to unnecessarily alter the Nellie Milton building by placing middle school students in the elementary space. This would be consistent with the wishes and advice of the staff and should actually reduce overall construction costs.
Also of concern is that the estimate of both cost and work required to make the building suitable was off by so much. After reviewing the plans, I declined to bid because it was clear the budget would not meet the required scope of work. I now have some of the same serious concerns about the projected budget on the larger project given that the estimate was off by nearly 100% on this fairly small piece. Everyone involved should have immediately grasped that the work required to satisfy the requirements of a Group E (educational) facility was greater than the dollars allocated.
The placement of the modular building may have been a fairly minor item in terms of money, but given its impact the school board should be re-analyzing the entire project due to the down stream effects. We should not be digging out of a hole before the project starts – and there is a chance to avoid that if clear and careful consideration, rather than bull-headed determinatiom takes place now.