Uniontown board hires building planner
Uniontown Area School Board hired MGT of America Inc. of Tallahassee, Tenn., as its facilities planner Tuesday. The national management research and consulting firm will conduct a feasibility study on all district buildings. The board voted 8-1 to hire the firm after Edward P. Humble, MGT senior partner, delivered a public presentation at the school board meeting on the planning expertise the firm will provide the school district.
The school district will pay $82,640 to complete the study on all district buildings.
The board opted for a feasibility study of all district schools – some of which have been renovated in recent years – rather than deciding to pay $71,711 for MGT’s other proposal to conduct a feasibility study for just Lafayette, Ben Franklin and the high school, known as the three city schools.
Director Alan George, also chairman of the board buildings and grounds committee, said the board decided against hiring DeJong & Associates of Columbus, Ohio, which he met with in January, since its cost to conduct a feasibility study for renovations to the three city schools was about $30,000 higher than the price MGT proposed for the same work.
Director Dorothy Grahek was the sole director to vote against hiring MGT. Grahek said she wasn’t included in meetings where the consulting firms presented proposals to board members. She also said feasibility studies already have been conducted on district buildings, including one that cost the district $89,500 performed by Foreman Architects of Zelienople in 2006.
That study was related to the high school renovation/addition project.
“How many times do we have to do this?” asked Grahek.
During his presentation, Humble said MGT has proposed to begin their work immediately, setting their sights on a June completion date.
Their work will be done in phases and will include studying demographics, enrollment, technology, education and strategic planning.
The public also will have a chance to participate in the process resulting in the study.
“This has to be your plan. Not our plan,” said Humble. “We have to be a team working together on this.”
According to Humble, phase one of the plan will assess and analyze existing facilities. Each building will receive a score based on an assessment of its physical condition, including interior walls and roof, an outside assessment of parking, athletic fields and as an assessment of how well the building works as a school.
Phase two includes collecting and analyzing school and community demographics, including the current use of the facility and how the district expects it to function, factors affecting building capacity, teacher preparation time, educational programs, safety, class size, historical data and enrollment projections, said Humble.
Phase three, he said, will review the educational programs and will involve input from the community.
Phase four, said Humble, will include standards the district hopes to reach for each building and cost estimates for renovation/construction projects. This phase also will include developing a master plan strategy, which will be presented to the public, said Humble.
Humble said he has toured the high school, noting that the architect that will design the school’s renovation/construction will need an “educational directive” because the building “is all over the place.”
He also said “educational sustainability issues” exist as some school buildings that “are not a priority in a long-range plan, but something to look at down the line.”
Humble said MGT has worked in 49 states, including Pennsylvania.
“We tried to make the cost enticing enough for you to do all of the buildings,” he told board members.