Fleet Maintenance Center And Utility Yard Study

1. Fleet Maintenance Center Study
for
Gloucester County Public Schools
HUDSON + ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS
FINAL DRAFT REPORT SUMMARY
School Board Presentation: February 23, 2017
Page 2

2. Fleet Maintenance Center Study for Gloucester County Public Schools
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
HISTORY: In early 2016, Gloucester County approached Hudson +
Associates Architects about possibility of undertaking a programming study
for a new vehicle maintenance and utilities center in conjunction with a
master plan for redevelopment of the Old Page Middle School site. The
master plan aspect of the Old Page Middle School site was eventually
dropped from the scope, and it was agreed that multiple sites would be
considered for the new Center.
CURRENT SITUATION: Maintenance for current County and School
board vehicles and equipment currently takes place in buildings that are
generally undersized and poorly suited to all types of vehicles in the
respective fleets. Certain major maintenance tasks cannot be performed
and must be tasked out to local, private shops. The Sheriff’s Department
opted to task all of its vehicle maintenance out to local shops due to
shortage of personnel and capabilities to suit its mission-essential needs.
Existing facilities are cramped, poorly lit and marginally ventilated. Storage
space for spare parts is limited, and the work environment is less-than-
pleasant for County personnel. Maintenance is performed in various,
scattered buildings. The Utilities Department likewise lacks sufficient
maintenance space and has current assets scattered among multiple,
marginally-suited buildings and yards. Many County assets such as trailers,
and towable equipment (generators, backhoes, mowers, etc.) are stored
outside in weather where they deteriorate. While County maintenance
personnel are meeting critical needs, they are doing so in facilities that are
far less-than-ideal.
METHOD OF ANALYSIS: Hudson + Associates Architects undertook
the following steps:
Major Tasks: What we looked for:
Meetings with key department
persons to understand
organizational needs
How departments are currently
organized; what does each person
do?
Meetings with key operational
persons to under organization
processes
How do personnel interact with
each other? With the current
facility?
Visits to all existing County
maintenance and storage facilities
currently in use
What is size, condition and layout of
current facilities? Identify
deficiencies
Visits to proposed sites within
Gloucester County and obtaining
local physical and topographical
data
Size and proportions of site,
elevation above floodplain, access
from streets, access to utilities,
opportunity to expand
Visits to facilities in other
neighboring counties that are
similar to the one proposed by this
Study
Evaluate comparative size,
amenities, functional layout, what
works well and signs of potential
obsolescence
PROPOSED SOLUTION: This Study contemplates design and
construction of a new, consolidated fleet maintenance and utility operations
center to suit requirement of the County, Utilities Department, School
Board, and Sheriff’s Department. Included will be the following major
program elements:
 Vehicle maintenance bays (garage) and related shop area
 School bus operations office
 Utilities Department office for maintainers
 Toilets, lockers and showers for maintenance personnel
Page 3

3. Fleet Maintenance Center Study for Gloucester County Public Schools
 Combined spares and parts storage with centralized inventory
management
 Vehicle wash bay (indoor)
 Vehicle fueling island (outdoor, covered) and oil-water separator
 Central warehouse storage for Utilities Department and County
equipment
 Outdoor covered storage for trailers, trailerable equipment and
materials
 Surface parking for fleet vehicles and personnel’s own vehicles
SITES FOR CONSIDERATION: The ideal site will have the following
attributes:
 Sufficient acreage to suit outdoor parking of the school bus fleet and
other County vehicles
 Suitable acreage and proportions for optimal workflow of vehicles,
parking and fueling
 Sufficient area to suit facility footprints, outdoor material storage, and
stormwater management
 Sufficient area to allow for future expansion of building(s) without
adverse impact on assets to remain
 Safety and ease of ingress into, and egress from, the site at adjacent
roadways
 Availability of utilities to support building(s) and site amenities
 Good vertical elevation above floodplain, and minimal impact from
wetlands
 Good soils for bearing pavements and building foundations
 Sufficient acreage for future expansion
Three sites were considered:
 Old Page Middle School site (off Rt. 17, near current School
Transportation Ctr.)
 Land adjacent to the T.C Walker Center (off T.C. Walker Road)
 Land Adjacent to the new Page Middle School site (off T.C. Walker
Road)
The site adjacent to the T.C. Walker Center was ruled out fairly quickly
because it was too small and was predominantly at too low a vertical
elevation to build upon. Also, to build the facility at this site would
constrain future reuse of the T.C. Walker Center as a school, if desired.
As for the other two sites:
 Old Page Middle School: site is favorable in size and flexibility, but
currently lacks ideal access to Route 17. Also, the site’s configuration
and current location of the water tower impact the layout and future
expansion. The existing School Transportation facility, however, may
be re-purposed for use by Utilities Maintenance, reducing need for
new construction to suits its needs. Lastly, this site may have higher
and beneficial use for economic development.
 Land Adjacent to the new Page Middle School: This site is also
favorable in size and flexibility, and offers good access to T.C. Walker
Road without adverse impact upon traffic flow in and out of the
Middle School. Its size and proportions are amenable to efficient use
and future expansion. This is a ‘virgin’ site, however, and will incur
higher costs to clear to support with new utilities. Also, T.C. Walker
Road must be widened to add new turn lanes into the center.
Page 4

4. Fleet Maintenance Center Study for Gloucester County Public Schools
PROPOSED BUILDING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT COSTS: A
preliminary, estimated budget is included herein that contemplates
construction of the new, consolidated Transportation and Utility Center and
all related site development. A separate estimate is included for each site,
due to the differing conditions and programmatic elements at each site.
Please note that:
 The overall figures are for budgeting purposes only, and is not based
on definitive design of the building(s) or site amenities.
 Additional site investigation, such as geotechnical investigation of
soils may be warranted.
 The overall figures assume that the primary maintenance garage and
warehouse facility will be built using pre-engineered building
structure and walls built at least partial height of masonry for
durability.
 A single-story building is preferred to avoid cost of stairwells and an
elevator.
Conceptual building floor plans and overall site plans (one for each site) are
offered herein upon which the estimated costs are based.
TIMETABLE TO IMPLEMENT: The proposed Transportation and
Utility Center can be designed and built as soon as funding is authorized by
Gloucester County. Some time constraints to consider include:
 Once approved and design is authorized to commence, a detailed
survey of the selected site will be required. An updated wetlands
delineation may be required, depending upon the selected site and
preferred layout. This can take up to 8-10 weeks to accomplish.
 Geotechnical investigation will be required to determine foundation
and pavement subgrade requirements.
 There should be no unusual environmental permitting required;
however, up to 90 days should be allowed for County review of the
definitive site plan and stormwater management design. This can be
expedited as early in the design process as possible to reduce impact
on overall timeframe to permit the project.
 6-8 months should be allowed for design, which includes the
aforementioned civil design and environmental review.
 6 weeks should be allowed for bidding.
 4 weeks should be allowed for review of bids and determination of
an acceptable low bidder. The apparent low bidder should submit its
insurance paperwork and performance bond for review prior to
award of contract.
 Due to the extensive sitework required, 16-18 months should be
allowed for construction following award of contract.
Other time factors to consider:
 30-60 days should be allowed to equip and furnish the new facility, as
well as to set up data and communication systems.
 The ideal time to relocate operations and vehicle maintenance to the
completed facility, from perspective of schools and bus
transportation, is mid-summer. There is no favored time for Utilities
or County vehicle maintenance.
 There will be some costs to move the operation and maintenance
entities into a new facility. It may be advantageous to bring in a
company specializing in such moves to shorten the downtime of the
various units.
Page 5

5. OVERVIEW – STUDY OBJECTIVE
 Assess condition of existing transportation administration and maintenance
facilities
 Gain understanding of current and projected (future) operational and
maintenance needs by interviewing Schools & County staff
 Explore efficiencies gained by consolidating Schools and County fleet
maintenance into a single facility. Also explore consolidation with the County
Utilities Maintenance Division.
 Evaluate and compare up to three (3) sites for locating the consolidated facility
at Old Page MS, T.C.Walker Center & next to New Page MS
 Prepare a cost model to develop the project for funding purposes
Page 6

6. CURRENT SITUATION
 Current facilities are antiquated, undersized and crowded
 Buildings no longer suited to size and diversity of vehicles to be maintained
 Working conditions are marginal, and poor at County Garage
 Several tasks are outsourced that could otherwise be performed
 Spare parts often not readily on hand (lack of storage)
 Unsheltered vehicles and equipment deteriorate more rapidly
 No manpower or capacity to maintain Sheriff’s vehicles
 Inefficient use of manpower due to shortage of personnel
Page 7

7. 36’L Bus in Maint. BayAerial View – Schools
Transportation Center
Front of
Building
Page 8

8. County Garage at Rt. 17 &
Providence Rd.
Page 9

9. Carriage Lane County & Utility
Maint. Dept. Facilities
COUNTY MAINTENANCE
SHED (SHELTER LOCATED
BEHIND TO LEFT)
UTILITIES
MAINTENANCE UNIT
BUILDING
UTILITIES
DEPARTMENT
ADMIN.
&CUSTOMER
SERVICE
CENTER
Utility Dept. Maint. Yard &
Facilities behind Southern States
Page 10

10. ADDITIONAL CHALLENGES
 Current buildings cannot be enlarged; poor value to enhance
 Equipment storage scattered in various locations
 County & Utilities: Shortage of maintenance & warehouse area
 Utilities “Yard” behind Southern States – buildings in poor condition
 Conditions adversely affect workflow, response & timely completion
 Excess employee time spent traveling between tasks & sites
 Longevity of vehicle & equipment assets is reduced
 Conditions not condusive to employee satisfaction or longevity
Page 11

11. NEW FACILITY OBJECTIVES
 Consolidate Schools & County fleet maintenance functions
 Modernize facilities that improve workflow and operational efficiency
 Increase storage capacity and maintenance capabilities
 Improve conditions for multiple County organizations under one project
 Enhance maintenance and extend life of vehicles & equipment
 Provide site layout that is spacious enough for larger, consolidated operation,
yet is efficient and cost-effective
 Site & building should have some initial growth capacity built-in
 Site must support opportunity to expand to suit longterm needs
Page 12

12. FLEET MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS
PUBLIC COUNTY & SHERIFF’S
SCHOOLS UTILITIES DEPT. TOTALS
Class 1 Passenger 49 45 72 166
Class 2 Trucks 34 29 9 72
Class 3 Buses 112* -- -- 112
Class 4 Trailers 8 17 3 ** 28
Class 5 Equipment 6 31 -- 37
TOTAL Vehicles 195 74 81 350
All Items 209 122 84 415
* 4 inspections/bus/year = 448 total inspections/year
** Includes Tactical Command Center
Page 13

13. TRANSPORTATION FACILITY PROGRAM
GARAGE:
 Maintenance Bays (7 double bays X 20’ wide x 110’ deep) 15,400 SF
 Parts Warehouse 3,100 SF
 Supervisor Office/Records/Break Area 800 SF
 Lockers/Toilets 1,000 SF
 Machine Shop/Batteries 1,500 SF
Sub-total, Garage 21,800 SF
TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION OFFICE: 2,400 SF
Common Area/Circulation: 1,200 SF
Sub-Total, Transportation 25,400 SF
Page 14

14. TRANSPORTATION FACILITY PROGRAM
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM: 25,400 SF
ADDITIONAL BUILDING PROGRAM:
 Equipment Maintenance Center (Off-road, mowers, tools) 1,750 SF
Total New Building Area, Old Page Site 27,150 SF
 Utilities Maintenance Division (Office/Lockers/Shop) 1,900 SF
Total New Building Area, New Page Site 29,050 SF
Page 15

15. TRANSPORTATION FACILITY PROGRAM
UTILITIES MAINTENANCE DIVISION:
 At the New Page site, Utilities Maintenance Division will have its offices and a
maintenance shop in the main, new building (totaling 1,900 SF) , sharing toilets and
other amenities with the Transportation/Garage functions.
 In addition, Utilities Maint. Div. will have a new 7,500 SF storage warehouse.
 Also, there will be another 7,500 SF of new outdoor covered shed area.
 At the Old Page site, Utilities Maintenance Division will re-occupy the existing,
vacated Transportation office & garage, totaling 7,500 SF.
 The existing building will require minor alterations and some renovations, including a
new roof.
 Also, there will be another 10,000 SF of new outdoor covered
shed area.
Page 16

16. Transportation
Administration
Consolidated
Vehicle Maint.
Utilities Maint.
Division
Equipment
Maintenance
Shared
MAINT. BAYS
UTIL.
MAINT.
DIV.
MACHINE
SHOP
PARTS
WASH
BAY
BRAKES
TIRES
EQUIP.
MAINT.
TRANSPORT’
N
ADMIN.
UTILITIES MAINT. DIVISION
OFFICES & SHOP INCLUDED
FOR NEW PAGE SITE
Page 17

17. Transportation
Administration
Consolidated
Vehicle Maint.
Equipment
Maintenance
Shared
MAINT. BAYS
MACHINE
SHOP
PARTS
WASH
BAY
BRAKES
TIRES
EQUIP.
MAINT.
TRANSPORT’
N
ADMIN.
ALTERNATE BUILDING PLAN
– REDUCED SIZE (OMITS
UTILITIES MAINT DIV.)
FOR OLD PAGE SITE
Page 18

18. FLEET MAINTENANCE – WHY 14 BAYS?
BUS
1
WASHBAY
BRAKES
TIRE
SHOP
TRUCK1
PASS
1
BUS
2
BUS
3
BUS
4
BUS
5
BUS
6
FLUIDS
PASS
3
PASS
2
TRUCK1
 Bays can also
“flex” as needed,
depending on
workload
 Trailers require less
time in shop, but
are typicallypulled
through
 One bay for “long-
term” work on
buses (#6)
Page 19

19. OLD PAGE MIDDLE SCHOOL SITE:
 Adequate acreage for larger, consolidated Transportation/County Garage
 Could support future expansion for Transportation & County Garage
 Site impacted somewhat by existing water tower & wetlands
 Existing transportation facility would not be affected by new construction
 Could locate at rear of site; preserve front of site for alternative use
 Access to Rt. 17 less than optimal, but could improve in future
 Utilities Maintenance Division is accommodated at existing Bus
Maint./Garage/Transportation Office, plus new Storage Sheds
 Reconfigured site and reused existing entrance drive at
north side of site; access on/off Rt. 17 is questionable
 Developed acreage & amenities now similar to New Page site
Page 20

20. T.C. WALKER
ROADEXISTING
SCHOOLS
TRANSPORTATION
OFFICE/MAINT.
CTR.
Page 21

21. T.C.
WALKER
ROAD
EXISTING SCHOOLS
TRANSPORTATION
OFFICE/MAINT. CTR.
– UTILITIES MAINT.
DIV.
EXISTIN
G WATER
TOWER
OLD PAGE SITE PLAN – Updated 2/23/17
0 100’ 400’
Page 22

22. T.C.
WALKER
ROAD
FUTURE ENTRY
ROAD
EXISTIN
G WATER
TOWER
OLD PAGE SITE PLAN – Updated 2/23/17
0 100’ 400’
FUTURE
EXPANSION
Page 23

23. NEW PAGE SCHOOL SITE:
 Adequate acreage for larger, consolidated Transportation/County Garage
 Could support future expansion
 Site minimally impacted by wetlands
 Access to T.C. Walker Road is optimal
 Can locate without impact to existing Middle School
 Preserves acreage for only one future school, but not two
 Utilities Maintenance Division is housed in new building with
Transporation; site also includes new Warehouse and Storage Sheds
 Add turn lanes off T.C. Walker Road
Page 24

24. T.C. WALKER
ROAD
EXISTING PAGE
MIDDLE
SCHOOL
Page 25

25. T.C. WALKER
ROAD
(WIDENED)
EXISTING PAGE
MIDDLE
SCHOOL
NEW PAGE SITE PLAN – Updated 2/23/17
0 100’ 400’
Page 26

26. T.C. WALKER
ROAD
(WIDENED)
EXISTING PAGE
MIDDLE
SCHOOL
NEW PAGE SITE PLAN – Updated 2/23/17
0 100’ 400’
FUTURE
EXPANSION
Page 27

27. T.C. WALKER CENTER SITE
 Limited acreage for a large, consolidated operations; impedes expansion
 Much of the site is at lower grade than existing Center
 Stream and wetlands impacts prevent full use of site
 Might limit future growth of T.C. Walker Center or return to use a school
 Access to T.C. Walker Road less than optimal, but workable
 Constraints to site layout and flow of traffic due to grade change
 Site cannot accommodate Utilities Maintenance Division
 Insufficient land at upper elevation to park all buses
 Soils might not be favorable to spread-footing foundations
 Potential impacts on existing Center during construction
 School Board determined this site is no longer to be considered
Page 28

28. EXISTING T.C.
WALKER
CENTER
T.C. WALKER
ROAD
30’60’
70’ 40’
25’
20’
50’
Page 29

29. EXISTING T.C.
WALKER
CENTER
T.C. WALKER
ROAD
Page 30

30. PROJECT COST ESTIMATE / COMPARISON
BUILDING COSTS OLD PAGE Site NEW PAGE Site
 Industrial Space (~$110/SF) $ 2,392,500 $ 2,442,000
 Office/Finished Space (~$175/SF) 945,000 1,198,750
Sub-Total, Primary Building $ 3,337,500 $ 3,640,750
 Utilities Maint. Div. Warehouse -- 500,000
 Re-Purpose Existing Transport’n Bldg. 112,500 --
 Re-Roof Existing Transport’n Bldg. 93,750 --
 Outdoor Covered Storage Shelter(s) 200,000 150,000
 Furnishings & Equipment 380,250 401,500
Sub-Total, Building Costs $ 4,124,000 $ 4,692,250
Page 31

31. PROJECT COST ESTIMATE / COMPARISON
SITEWORK COSTS OLD PAGE Site NEW PAGE Site
 Site Improvements $ 900,750 $ 1,567,600
 Grading & Drainage 220,350 265,975
 Utilities – Water/Sewer/Fuels 164,650 394,250
 Utilities - Electrical 240,000 381,000
Sub-Total, Sitework Costs $ 1,525,600 $ 2,608,825
w/Building Cost, Rounded 5,650,000 7,301,000
With Contingency (+10%) 6,215,000 8,031,000
Design + Engineering 497,000 642,000
Estimated Total Project Cost $ 6,712,000 $ 8,673,000
Site acreage 16.14 acres 16.39 acres
Sitework, Cost/acre $ 94,532/acre $ 159,172/acre
Page 32

32. GLOUCESTER COUNTY TRANSPORTATION CENTER STUDY
COST ESTIMATE FEBRUARY 23, 2017 QTY. $/UNIT COST QTY. $/UNIT COST
BUILDING COSTS
MAIN BUILDING SF
INDUSTRIAL SPACE SF 21,750 110.00 2,392,500 22,200 110.00 2,442,000 49,500
OFFICE/FINISHED SPACE SF 5,400 175.00 945,000 6,850 175.00 1,198,750 253,750
SUB-TOTAL, PRIMARY BUILDING SF 27,150 3,337,500 29,050 3,640,750 303,250
UTILITIES MAINT. DIV. - WAREHOUSE (NEW PAGE) SF - 10,000 50.00 500,000 500,000
RE-PURPOSE EXISTING TRANSPORT'N BLDG (OLD PAGE) SF 7,500 15.00 112,500 - (112,500)
RE-ROOF EXISTING TRANSPORT'N BLDG (OLD PAGE) SF 7,500 12.50 93,750 (93,750)
OUTDOOR COVERED STORAGE SHELTER(S) SF 10,000 20.00 200,000 7,500 20.00 150,000 (50,000)
FURNISHINGS & EQUIPMENT LS 380,250 401,500 21,250
SUB-TOTAL, BUILDING COSTS 4,124,000$ 4,692,250$ 568,250$
SITEWORK
SITE IMPROVEMENTS
IMPROVE T.C. WALKER ROAD LF - 1,800 225 405,000 405,000
ADD TURN LANE ON RT.17 LF 300 225 67,500 - (67,500)
SITE CLEARING AC 2.00 20,000 40,000 16.39 20,000 327,800 287,800
SITE DEMOLITION/PAVEMENT REMOVAL SF 38,000 - - -
EARTHWORK CY 18,150 5.00 90,750 26,460 5.00 132,300 41,550
CANOPY AT FUEL ISLAND SF 2,000 15.00 30,000 2,000 15.00 30,000 -
NEW PAVEMENT - FLEXIBLE SY 48,500 10.00 485,000 48,500 10.00 485,000 -
NEW PAVEMENT - RIGID SY 2,800 25.00 70,000 2,800 25.00 70,000 -
TURF/LANDSCAPING AC 3 25,000 75,000 3 25,000 75,000 -
FENCING LF 3,150 - 3,150 - -
GATES EA 2 15,000 30,000 2 15,000 30,000 -
SIGNAGE LS -- 5,000 5,000 -
SIDEWALK/EQUIPMENT PADS LS -- 7,500 7,500 -
GRADING & DRAINAGE -
BMP/RETENTION POND CY 6,000 15.00 90,000 9,000 15.00 135,000 45,000
CURB & GUTTER LF 3,000 7.50 22,500 3,000 7.50 22,500 -
DRAINAGE STRUCTURES EA 5 7,500 37,500 5 7,500 37,500 -
UNDERGROUND PIPING LF 1,000 30.00 30,000 1,000 30.00 30,000 -
EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL AC 16.14 2,500 40,350 16.39 2,500 40,975 625
OLD PAGE SITE NEW PAGE SITE
UNITS Δ
Page 33

33. GLOUCESTER COUNTY TRANSPORTATION CENTER STUDY
COST ESTIMATE FEBRUARY 23, 2017 QTY. $/UNIT COST QTY. $/UNIT COST
OLD PAGE SITE NEW PAGE SITE
UNITS Δ
UTILITIES
WATER/SEWER/FUELS
EXTEND WATER SERVICE, 8-INCH LF 600 64 38,400 -- - (38,400)
EXTEND WATER SERVICE, 16-INCH LF -- - 1,500 125 187,500 187,500
SANITARY SEWER - GRAVITY, 8-INCH LF 600 40 24,000 1,500 40 60,000 36,000
S.S. MANHOLE EA 1 20,000 20,000 2 20,000 40,000 20,000
S.S. GRINDER PUMP/LIFT STATION EA -- - 1 15,000 15,000 15,000
DOMESTIC WATER LINE, 3-INCH LF 250 30 7,500 350 30 10,500 3,000
SPRINKLER WATER LINE, 6-INCH LF 250 65 16,250 350 65 22,750 6,500
FIRE HYDRANTS EA 2 3,000 6,000 2 3,000 6,000 -
BACKFLOW PREVENTER EA 1 5,000 5,000 1 5,000 5,000 -
PROPANE GAS SERVICE & PAD LS -- 7,500 -- 7,500 -
RELOCATE FUEL ISLAND LS -- 10,000 -- 10,000 -
OIL-WATER SEPARATOR, FUEL PAD (20,000 GAL) EA 1 25,000 25,000 1 25,000 25,000 -
OIL-WATER SEPARATOR, BUILDING (1,500 GAL) EA 1 5,000 5,000 1 5,000 5,000 -
ELECTRICAL -
POWER TO BUILDING, AERIAL LF -- - 1,500 30 45,000 45,000
POWER TO BUILDING, BURIED, DUCTBANK LS -- 50,000 -- 50,000 -
TRANSFORMER EA 1 20,000 20,000 2 18,000 36,000 16,000
STANDBY GENERATOR, DIESEL, 150 KW EA 1 45,000 45,000 1 45,000 45,000 -
TELECOMMUNICATIONS LS -- 75,000 -- 155,000 80,000
SITE LIGHTING - POLES EA 20 2,500 50,000 20 2,500 50,000 -
SUB-TOTAL, SITEWORK COSTS 1,525,750$ 2,608,825$ 1,083,075$
SITE ACREAGE 16.14 16.39 0
SITEWORK COST / ACRE 94,532$ 159,172$ 64,640$
-
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS, ESTIMATED 5,649,750$ 7,301,075$ 1,651,325$
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS, ROUNDED 5,650,000 7,301,000 1,651,000
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS, W/CONTINGENCY (+10%) 6,215,000 8,031,000 1,816,000
DESIGN + ENGINEERING 497,000 642,000 145,000
ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST 6,712,000$ 8,673,000$ 1,961,000$
Page 34

34. SITES – COMPARATIVE DISCUSSION
Old Page
School site
New Page
School site
 Lesser cost to develop; minimal clearing and grading required
 Utilities already on (or near) site that appear adequate, including fueling
 Access to Route 17 remains configured as-is today – not ideal, but adequate
 Improving access to Rt. 17 not essential; but could be quite costly
 Re-utilizes existing Transportation office/garage; well-suited to Utilities
Maintenance Division needs
 Portion of existing site remains undeveloped – available for future expansion
 Higher cost to develop
 Relatively high site costs for clearing, earthwork and grading, new utilities
 Higher cost to build 100% new space for Utilities Maintenance Division
 Good access off T.C. Walker Road for optimized ingress/egress; but must
widen T.C. Walker Road with new turn lanes
 More flexible site arrangement & internal movement than Old Page
 Building at New Page site allows alternative use at Old Page site;
land used for this project is no longer available for a future school
Page 35

35. SITES – “BOTTOM LINE” COMPARISON
Old Page
School site
New Page
School site
Lower cost to redevelop
Access to Route 17, if unchanged, remains adequate but less than
ideal, and can present safety challenges for left-turning traffic
exiting the site
Re-purposes the existing School Transportation office & garage
for use by Utilities Maintenance Division
Higher cost to develop (nearly $2 million delta)
Ideal access off T.C. Walker Road; safe ingress/egress
Building at New Page site allows alternative use at Old Page site
Page 36

36. COMMENTS RECEIVED & RESPONSES
 Incorporate Mosquito Control Vehicle Parking
 The Mosquito Control vehicles (2) and its chemical storage/handling area
will be located inside the Warehouse with Utilities Maintenance, partitioned
off separately from other functions. At the Old Page site, this amounts to
one bay of the existing Schools Transportation Building.
 Recommend extending 8-inch water lines into site in order to include
fire sprinklers at the buildings and support new fire hydrants
Sprinklers will be required at the main Admin./Garage building, but will
likely not be required at the Warehouse due to its size and function. New
fire hydrants will be required at either site, and the cost estimate will be
increased to include more 8-inch water piping.
Page 37

37. COMMENTS RECEIVED & RESPONSES
 Consider reducing the number of buses that need to be stored on the
site to 160; and consolidate the buses in such a manner that, when all
parked on the site, they occupy as minimal a footprint as necessary, to
reduce acreage developed and new impervious surface.
 Will do. There may be reduction of impervious area by as much as 15,000-
30,000 SF, resulting in minor cost savings at both sites for new pavement,
earthwork/grading, and stormwater treatment.
 Revisit the estimated cost for sanitary sewer force main extension at the New
Page Site.
 Will do. Additional cost (minor) for a new force main to the New Page Middle
School pump station will be included. Will discuss further with Utilities if
Upgrade to the School pump station and/or force main beyond is needed. The
sewer discharge rate can be reduced with a holding tank at the New Page site.
Page 38

38. architecture
interior design
planning
RICHARD S. CORNER, AIA, CSI
SENIOR PARTNER
KEITH MUSHENSKI, AIAA
PARTNER
120 WEST QUEENS WAY, #201
HAMPTON, VA 23669
757 • 722 • 1964
www.hudsonarch.com
Page 39