 |
 |
 |
|
Common Council
Actions
|
COMMON COUNCIL ACTION
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COMMON COUNCIL - APRIL 27, 2004
| ALL COMMON COUNCIL ACTIONS TAKEN AT THIS MEETING TO APPROVE EXPENDITURES AND CONTRACTS OR TO ACCEPT BIDS AND OTHER PROPOSALS REQUIRING THE EXPENDITURE OF CITY FUNDS ARE SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS. |
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORWALK IS HEREBY CALLED AND WILL BE HELD ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT NORWALK CITY HALL, 125 EAST AVENUE, NORWALK, FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES TO WIT:
The Mayor, Alex A. Knopp, called the special meeting to order at 7:10 pm and led the assembly into the Pledge of Allegiance
1. ROLL CALL
Betsy Bain Bruce Kimmel
Kenneth Baker Richard McQuaid
Fred Bondi (7:20pm) Matthew Miklave (absent)
Michael Coffey (absent) Jeanette Olmstead-Sawyer (absent)
Carvin Hilliard Kevin Poruban
Douglas Hempstead Douglas Sutton
William Krummel Peter Wien
Leona Williams (absent)
There were ten (10) members present for Roll Call.
________________________________________________________________________________
II. ACCEPTANCE OF THE CALL OF THE MEETING
City Clerk, Pam Stark read the call of the meeting. There were no objections to the call of the meeting.
________________________________________________________________________________
III. MAYOR
Mayor Knopp said that as reported at the last regular meeting Gilbane had completed its review of the facilities construction plan for the Board of Education and tonight they will be presenting an overview of this.
________________________________________________________________________________
IV. NORWALK FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION COMMISSION
1. A presentation from Gilbane Building Company on its review of Norwalk Public School Facilities Construction plan entitled “Norwalk Public Schools Facilities Audit and Analysis and Priority Needs Assessment”.
Mr. Hawley introduced Ben Burdsall the project manager who presented the following:
- Norwalk Public Schools – Facilities Audit and Analysis & Priority Needs Assessment
- 1.0 Study Purpose
Mr. Bondi joined the meeting at 7:20 pm.
- 1.0 Background
- 1.0 Study Methodology
- 2.0 Enrollment Findings
- 3.0 Working Assumptions
- 4.0 Physical Facilities Evaluation – Inventory
- 4.0 Physical Facilities Evaluation – Methodology
- 4.0 Physical Facilities Evaluation – Rating Scale
- 4.0 Physical Facilities Evaluation – Schools Needing the Most Work
- 4.0 Physical Facilities Evaluation – Schools Needing Considerable Work
- 4.0 Physical Facilities Evaluation – Schools in Relatively Good Condition
- 5.0 Priority Needs Assessment
- 5.0 Priority Needs Assessment – Other Consideration
- 5.0 Priority Needs Assessment – Develop Budgets
- 6.0 Proposed Master Plan – Anticipated State Reimbursement
- 6.0 Proposed Master Plan – Projected Budgets
- 6.0 Proposed Master Plan
- 6.0 Proposed Schedule
- 6.0 Proposed Master Plan – Recommended Initial Projects
- Next Steps
The Mayor asked if there were any questions or comments from Council members.
Mr. Kimmel referred to section 1:3 of the binder, the purpose of the study; he confirmed that this was a result of discussions with the Board of Education.
Mr. Burdsall said that he knew the Board of Education were considering other options, but he had no idea under what kind of time frame.
Mr. Kimmel noted his confusion about square footage per child,.
Mr. Burdsall replied that it is indicative that the schools are crowded and in some cases more than others. The state recommendation for elementary schools is 125 sq ft per child.
Mr. Kimmel said they would have to look at the enrollment projections first. Mr. Burdsall concurred.
Mr. Hawley added that the projections for enrollment are given to them. It is particularly hard at the elementary level as there is no trend to watch. The information given is like a moving target but the trends are used to determine the projections.
Mr. Kimmel indicated that Gilbane did a great job staying within the financial constraints and that it looks like the way to go.
Mr. Burdsall thanked Mr. Kimmel. He pointed out that the $70 million will not do everything but it will go a very long way toward addressing priorities and making an impact on the facilities.
Mr. Hempstead said as far as standards go with the state, could they get a broader look at that; to make sure that equalization throughout all of the schools. He also asked that they incorporate into the study the facility as a whole (the parking lots, playgrounds etc.)
Mr. Burdsall said that this had been done, site-by-site.
Mr. Hempstead asked if Gilbane had taken advantage of low energy programs. Mr. Hawley stated that they had.
Mr. Bondi said it is projected that the school enrollment will be going down; they are looking at 800-900 units of housing being built in the city in the next five years. He asked how they could project those numbers going down.
Mr. Burdsall said that is a good example of how enrollment numbers can change; it is an inexact science. You are looking for trends, exact numbers cannot be pinned down.
Ms. Bain referred to the impact of the pre-K situation; a report by the state showed that they should not expect all of them housed in the elementary schools. It might make sense to look at that to see if there is a higher rate of reimbursement.
Mayor Knopp said with regard to pre-schools, Gilbane was asked to take the document that the Board of Education had approved and to review the constructability of it; also to come up with a cost estimate. The facilities plan did not include classrooms for pre-school and therefore at his request this was added to the report. This is a policy change that they might want to consider.
Mr. Hempstead asked if any federal funding was available.
Mr. Hawley replied that there was not.
Mayor Knopp stated that they had selected Gilbane for this role is that they have played the same role for forty-three schools in New Haven.
Mr. Hempstead commented that this is an excellent package and well thought out.
Mr. Burdsall said this is a flexible and can be adjusted or re-examined at any time.
Mayor Knopp said he hoped the Board of Education will be able to act on this by their next meeting so they are able to meet the June 30 deadline.
________________________________________________________________________________
V. ADJOURNMENT
** MS. BAIN MOVED TO ADJOURN.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 pm.
ATTEST: ___________________________________________
Pam Stark, City Clerk
 |
 |