Capital Budget '10/11: schools - code compliance
Yesterday I provided this overview of the proposed capital budget for the schools, including this spreadsheet regarding "code compliance" issues:
Now I offer the explanation for the code compliance issues:
And here are some of the pricier details of the code compliance issues:
If you read the comments under this post, you'll see some related thoughts from BOE member Tony Perugini.
As for me... I don't see the logic in spending $437,500 for a press box elevator, particularly at a time when Cheshire and the entire nation is losing classroom teachers. But if someone really pushes this, maybe the press box gets moved down to the field?
Tim White
18 comments:
If we are going to put up a 3 story elevator then we might as well rebuild the rotting out and cramped press box atthe same time. There is no room to work inside it and the fire marshal closed it down atleast once last season. The wiring inside is deadly and it lacks fire escapes
$60,000+ for proper signage for all Areas of Refuge is pretty interesting. Just have to wonder what is 'signage,' it doesn't seem to be a real word to begin with. OH well, we are talking about the BOE so maybe that doesn't matter much.
Those areas of refuge seem to be pretty new to begin with too. Not like they were around since 1975. Most seem to have come about with the last CHS addition which is not so old that at this point the signs are so out of date they require almost 100 grand to be upgraded.
Did someone forget to configure the recent high school addition to be in compliance with existing rules and regulations? Hope they didn't miss the truly big ticket items on electrical and fire codes. Maybe there will be more on that in association with upcoming football field issues.
It's kind of hard to believe with all the high priced administrative supervision the BOE and PWD contains that this kind of stuff is found after the fact by outsiders. Don't our administrators routinely walk down their buildings and read the signs and look for missing signs?
There won't be any elevator for a press box as far as I'm concerned. The press or anyone else can stand at ground level and do their thing. This is an absurd waste of taxpayer money to accomodate the rare event a handicapped reporter has to access the upstairs booth. Eliminate the upstairs booth, everyone is on equal footing at ground level. End of problem.
Next thing some regulator will want ramps to the top tier of the bleachers. At what point do we just say no...I say now.
Tim Slocum
"area of refuge" is an area designated by building design to provide safe exit or waiting in a building for rescue during times of emergency. Most commonly, these areas are stairways as they have added reinforcement in their construction. The signage, as I understand it, is to be visable in low light applications and lead individuals with little to no knowladge of a building to safety. Required signage includes designation of an area, directions to areas and maps that show all areas. I would believe that new emergency routing signs will be placed on the floor/lower walls to aid those crawling in smoky conditions
The fact that there is even $437K in the BOE budget to begin with shows nothing but lunacy. How could Dr Florio (or whomever) even dare to put this in the budget
the fact that municipal overtime is over $600,000 is lunacy but of course you don't say anything about that because you are benefiting from it but you begrudge education you old fart. how dare cunningham who sits on his backside all day make over $20,000 in overtime. i can't believe someone put that in the budget
"The fact that there is even $437K in the BOE budget to begin with shows nothing but lunacy. How could Dr Florio (or whomever) even dare to put this in the budget"
Try to read this carefully...it's a STATE MANDATE, you have no choice but to comply or face penalties/fines including cuts in State funding. Do some homework before you open your mouth.
7:01 "The signage, as I understand it, is to be visable in low light applications and lead individuals with little to no knowladge of a building to safety. "
Great idea. No thoughts on whether or not the signs need to be visible in high light situations though -- maybe that comes from the next audit?
Of course maybe just issuing flashlights to everyone entering the building would provide illumination during low light situations. And then again if you could safely keep your cell phone with you at CHS it might serve as a light source during low light emergency situations too.
Then again maybe we should just stow battle lanterns at strategic locations throughout the building for use when an emergency occurs.
On second thought, most of those special areas of refuge are so new one just has to wonder how/why they were not adequately equipped already with whatever it is you were trying to describe. Guess they got the part down about "they have added reinforcement in their construction" but somehow the signs were missed or the signs were wrong or the signs were forgotten or the signs were lost or maybe someone just decided on their very own that they liked a different kind of sign- - -
Is anyone watching out for the tax paying public whenever this town spends money on a public building the first time - - -??
Wow, you really dont understand anything, do you? First off, "state mandate" means required by state law. If we refuse to follow the mandates, they (the state) refuse to give us funding (I.E. education funding, open space funding, PILOT funding, etc)
Some of the signage required is a direct result of 9/11. People in the buildings became lost because they could not find their way out of the buildings. As children, we are taught to stay low and crawl if there is smoke. What good does it do to have exit signs and directions posted 4-8 feet off the ground? New mandates require signs and arrows placed at floor level so our kids can find their way out.
I do not know what was required during the last expansion, but if the state says we need to make these changes to keep receiving funding, we should comply. Mandate does not mean we can pick and choose what changes to make.
"... Wow, you really dont understand anything, do you? ...I do not know what was required during the last expansion, but if the state says we need to make these changes to keep receiving funding, we should comply. Mandate does not mean we can pick and choose what changes to make...."
Many of us understand and some of us seem to want to hide behind the idea that somebody somewhere else can just come by and tell us we have to do something and there is no recourse. Some even seem to believe that it was only just yesterday that the requirements for exit signs came along.
And there are more than a few of us who just keep wondering as we watch local government at its all time best - - during budget season here in Cheshire. The stories, the half truths, the blaming of others, the endless annual repeats for money for the same unfunded discretionary items.
It is just hard to believe that in the past 12 months first the state wrote new legislation which will require even relatively new schools to immediately backfit relatively new signs with slightly newer ones because the relatively new ones just are not safe enough. Gosh, if they were okay 24 months ago why are they now so dangerous we can't any longer live with them?
What is easier to believe is that maybe, just maybe the most recent massive CHS upgrade wasn't done as well as it should have been. Maybe we forgot to put the correct signs in a couple of years ago. Maybe the original funding for the latest upgrade wasn't spent as well as it should have been.
All one has to do is look right across the street from CHS to see yet another fine example of just how this town's government managers actually treat the town residents hard earned tax dollars.
I'm one resident who believes there is way to much smoke and mirrors in use by town government managers at all levels and maybe we could better use some of their magic mirrors to re-direct moon light and car headlamps into the areas of refuge at CHS on dark nights! Light is such a bright thing to waste on brightening the background when it should be focused on things which can hide in the dark of public budget proposals.
Matt Jalowiec signs are being stolen. I'm not surprised. That's the way some play politics.
"It is just hard to believe that in the past 12 months first the state wrote new legislation which will require even relatively new schools to immediately backfit relatively new signs with slightly newer ones because the relatively new ones just are not safe enough."
The legislation is not new...the Civil Rights Assessment (at least the agency) has been in place for some time. To the best of my knowledge, Cheshire has not had a CRA assessment at any of it's school buildings prior to last year. CHS was picked randomly by Hartford. There's much debate among the administration and the BOE about what constitutes a "violation" vs. what's realistic and practical.
What perplexes me is that our schools are reviewed by the building inspector's office (Buiding Dept) fire marshall as well as our own management within the school system. Not to mention that renovations are designed by engineers/architects that take into consideration ADA compliance among other factors.
For example, how can it be that our building dept doesn't see the need for this level of signage for "areas of refuse" but Hartford does?
So, how is it that there's such a big disconnect between all of our local officials and Hartford when it comes to CRA compliance in our schools? Something doesn't add up here and I don't believe Cheshire is incompetent on this matter.
What more concerning is that Hartford can come back and randomly audit any other school building in town. Imagine what they will find at Humiston, for example?
Tony Perugini
BOE
Tony,
Imagine what they'll find at the state capital building.
TS
"Tony,
Imagine what they'll find at the state capital building.
TS"
You mean other than the $41B pension liability ($16B gap) and projected $3B budget shortfall on top of the nearly $1B the state is borrowing to get by? Hmm...they'll probably find Jimmy Hoffa buried under the capital building. :-)
TP
"...The legislation is not new...the Civil Rights Assessment (at least the agency) has been in place for some time. To the best of my knowledge, Cheshire has not had a CRA assessment at any of it's school buildings prior to last year. ..."
Tony, could it be you are the first town official who has admitted the obvious? Keep asking questions. In the private sector management doesn't last very long when time and again they have trouble anticipating what really needs to go into a new building or facility.
In the private sector employees and management usually are assessed on a number of points. If you are responsible for compliance to codes and standards, missing code requirements usually results in the loss of your next pay raise or worse.
Tony, does anyone know if the town management players on school projects are annually reviewed on whether or not they were responsible for failing to identify code violations before an outside agency made the identification for them? It would seem that a BOE would want to make sure that the hired hands knew there was a clear expectation on the part of the board that code violations needed to be identified and reported to the board immediately as opposed to waiting for some outside agency to maybe publicly report it through a random audit.
Imagine 60 yrs ago we were told to stay under our desks. I'm still alive today. All these rules and mandates???
"It would seem that a BOE would want to make sure that the hired hands knew there was a clear expectation on the part of the board that code violations needed to be identified and reported to the board immediately as opposed to waiting for some outside agency to maybe publicly report it through a random audit."
I understand your point but I don't think it applies to this situation because according to "code" these renovations, upgrades, etc. have been done according to code and to the PBC/Building Inspector/Architect/Engineer/Fire Marshall approval, and in this case, ADA guidelines/requirements and in most cases had portions paid for by State reimbursement grants.
If it's good enough for these authorities, including Hartford, then how is it possible it's not good enough for the State Dept of Education???
But the Civil Rights Audit is a random, subjective review that goes above and beyond our codes and officials. Think of it as an agency with override ability and no liability.
How did this happen? Why did this happen? What will our town officials do/change to make certain this never happens again?
I don't have the answers to these questions but I'm willing to work with our town officials to get the answers and to resolve this situation as quickly as possible.
Thanks.
Tony p
"...But the Civil Rights Audit is a random, subjective review that goes above and beyond our codes and officials. Think of it as an agency with override ability and no liability...."
Tony what you describe here seems to indicate some rogue group making up the rules as they go along. They complete their task and when done we jump up and say, you got us, we agree too. At that point we just throw money at whatever it is even though there was no liability.
Something seems to be missing in your discussion. Are we now spending more money of signs in order to upgrade to some written code or standard which was in existence prior to the facility upgrade or has some state agency invented on its own with no outside oversight some special requirements just for Cheshire?
Post a Comment