Overview

The purpose of this document is to provide an update to the congregation on the current status of the planned nave renovations, with particular focus on the key decisions that will need to be made in the coming months. The information in this document basically summarizes the materials presented to the Vestry up to this point by the Renovation Committee. The Renovation Committee will continue to update the Vestry at its December meeting, and we anticipate that the Vestry will make final decisions on these design alternatives at its January meeting. Once those decisions are made, our architects and general contractor will obtain final bids for the actual project. We anticipate construction will begin after Easter 2016.

The costs used in this document are estimates, but they are fairly detailed estimates prepared by our general contractor. The costs include allowances for “soft costs” (like permitting costs, design fees, inspections) and allowances for unforeseen contingencies (typically calculated as a percentage of the construction costs). We will receive updated cost estimates from the architect and general contractor in early December, and the actual cost of the construction may vary from what is listed here.

Background

In order to understand the present situation, it is useful to review the process that occurred earlier this year. When the capital campaign concluded back in the spring, we had, for the first time, an actual amount of money pledged for this project. That pledged amount currently stands at about $ 1,480,000 (including $176,000 Alice Cox bequest). The Renovation Committee worked with our architects to determine what we might be able to build on that budget. This process involved making some choices between various options that we had been discussing. The Renovation Committee asked the Vestry to give us some guidance, and the Vestry responded by asking us to prioritize the goal of making the nave more accessible by lowering the floor of the chancel.

The Renovation Committee then went back to work with the architects, and prepared an approach that lowered the chancel floor and accomplished as many of the other objectives as would fit within the budget. We prioritized those objectives that could both be accomplished within the budget and that would make sense in the context of the larger construction project. For example, it made sense to integrate the replacement of the in-floor radiant heating system in the nave into this construction, since the floor of the nave was already being taken up. Some of the other options, such as lighting or sound systems, could easily be accomplished as follow- on projects since they do not require significant construction.

We refer to the proposal developed by the architects as the “baseline” option. The baseline aims to be what we can actually afford with the money pledged in the capital campaign. At the moment, the baseline is somewhat above the pledged amount, as a number of the cost estimates have changed. In addition to the baseline, we have broken out design “alternates” that could be added to the baseline if additional funds become available, or could be pursued as follow-on projects if funds are not immediately available.

The Baseline Option

The current baseline option is projected to cost $ 1,544,379. Of this amount, roughly 1⁄3 represents “soft costs” and contingencies. The remaining 2⁄3 represent actual construction costs. This breakdown is fairly typical for a construction project of this size. As noted above, the “soft costs” cover architect’s fees, legal fees, costs associated with obtaining the necessary permits, as well as an allowance for contingencies and some non-construction items.

The baseline option includes the following work:

●  The lowering of the chancel floor to the level of the nave, along with the construction of a new platform for the altar.

●  The replacement of all flooring with porcelain tile in the nave and chancel areas.

●  The replacement of the boiler and the in-floor radiant heating system with new equipment. The architects determined that the in-floor radiant design remains the most efficient and effective way to heat the nave.

● The replacement of the doors (beside pulpit) leading from the nave to the narthex.

● The replacement of the air conditioning equipment. The new air conditioning system would be housed in a modified version of the structures now present in the four corners of the nave. The size and shape of the structures in the front (chancel area) of the church would allow for the installation of a new organ in the future.

●  Seating for the nave: The baseline estimate includes funds for either the replacement of the existing pews with chairs or for the refurbishment and re-installation of the existing pews. For budgeting purposes, we have included the higher number, which is for chairs. If we were to decide to keep the current pews, the estimate for seating would decrease by $ 15,000-18,000.

●  Structural work in San Jose: The baseline includes necessary repairs to the foundation and electrical systems in San Jose, along with the construction of a covered entrance for the exterior door. Other improvements to the interior of San Jose (such as new lighting, chairs etc.) would be separately funded by the San Jose congregation.

●  The baseline includes necessary asbestos abatement in the nave. If San Jose chooses to install a new floor in the chapel, the cost of asbestos abatement for the chapel (roughly $ 13,000) would be added to the baseline.

Design Alternative Options

Each option described below has an estimated cost that includes an allocation for “soft costs” and contingencies. The first two options could only be accomplished as part of the renovation construction, as they would need to be integrated into the construction process. The remaining alternates also could be accomplished as free-standing projects at some later date, though they could be integrated into the existing renovation.

●  Under-floor ductwork for the air conditioning system ($ 75,000): As noted above, the baseline places new air conditioning equipment in roughly the same position as the current gear. In the baseline, the cooled air enters the nave through vents in the “corner structures,” just as it does today. We have the option of installing air vents and ductwork beneath the floor, so that the cooled air would enter the nave through vents in the floor along the sides of the nave. This option, while it would not eliminate the corner structure (which are still needed for return vents), would create a much more quiet and efficient distribution of air. The acoustician that we are working with believes that this option would substantially improve the acoustics of our space.

●  Labyrinth in Nave Floor ($ 22,500): The baseline includes a new tile floor in the nave. It is possible to install tile that have an engraved labyrinth design in the nave floor. This option would require the use of chairs in the nave.

●  New lighting for Nave ($ 138,700): This option would include a comprehensive upgrade to the nave lighting, and the installation of modern lighting control systems. The design would not only improve the lighting of the space, but would replace the existing lights with more efficient and more easily maintained options.

●  New Sound System for the Nave ($ 87,500): This option would replace the existing sound system with modern equipment and controls designed to address the acoustical problems we currently experience in the nave with both music and the spoken word.

●  Acoustical upgrades to Chancel ($ 37,200): This option would retrofit the walls of the chancel area with foam insulation. At present the walls are hollow and uninsulated. Filling the walls with foam insulation would improve the acoustics of the chancel area and improve the hearing of music in the nave.

●  Acoustical upgrades to ceilings ($ 109,000): The option would involve installing additional materials to the ceilings of both the chancel and the nave. The chancel ceiling material would help with the projection of music into the nave. The nave ceiling material would improve the nave acoustics for both music and the spoken work. In the nave, the material is simply an additional layer placed over the existing ceiling and would not substantially alter the appearance of the ceiling.

What is not included

The description above covers the current state of the renovation project; specifically, the work funded directly by the capital campaign. The description does not include two specific areas:

● San Jose interior: As noted above, the renovation baseline includes structural and safety related upgrades to the chapel space used by San Jose. Since we are responsible for this space, it is appropriate that St. George’s take responsibility for properly maintaining the structure and ensuring that the key systems are operational and safe. San Jose is responsible for choosing what is done inside their worship space. San Jose is also doing its own fundraising and pursuing grants that will be used to pay for the interior work. San Jose is considering a number of options for the interior space, including new chairs, new liturgical furnishings, a new floor, and upgrades to the lighting or sound system. All of this work is coordinated with the architects and general contractor for the overall renovation project.

● Ongoing Maintenance Work: Although the renovation project addresses several long- standing deferred maintenance needs, it does not include a variety maintenance projects throughout our physical plant. The Building & Grounds committee will continue to address such projects before, during, and after the renovation work. At present, B&G is addressing a drainage issue in the parking lot, an issue with masonry around the rose window in the chancel, and other projects. In preparation for both San Jose and St. George’s use of the parish hall as worship space during construction, B&G is arranging for the replacement of the tile floor. There is overlapping membership between the B&G and Renovation Committees, and all activities are coordinated. 

What happens next?

Toward the end of this year, our architects and general contractor will begin the process of obtaining the necessary construction permits from Arlington County. Following that, the general contractor will bid out various portions of the project to subcontractors. At the point when actual contracts are being signed, and materials begin to be ordered, we will need to have made final decisions about the alternative options described above. At that point, they will cease to be options, and we will lose the ability to easily make changes in the construction plan. Therefore, if you would like to increase your pledge to fund any of these options, please speak to one of the tri-chairs as soon as possible.

In practical terms, this means that the major decisions will need to be made by the Vestry at its January 2016 meeting. At that meeting, the Vestry will need to approve construction of the baseline project, and will need to decide which, if any, of the alternative options are to be added to the project. As indicated above, any of the present alternative options represent costs in excess of the amount that we now have pledged. If the Vestry decides to include an option, it will need to determine how that option is to be funded. There could be additional funds pledged by the time the Vestry makes its decision. The Vestry could also decide to use money from the church’s savings (“Altar and Special Funds”) or to borrow money. These decisions would be made by the Vestry; the Renovation Committee would then proceed to execute the project with whatever options the Vestry has selected.

If you have questions please feel free to speak to Rev. Shearon Sykes WIlliams, Crystal Hardin, Senior Warden, or any of the three tri-chairs.

In Peace,

David Grahn
Michael Woods
Elena Keydel
Renovation Committee Tri-chairs