56K - views

Building Project

Community Meeting. Fieldcrest High School. February 18, 2016. 7:30 pm. Introductions. Mr. Tom Barth, Board member. Mr. Greg Kroeschen, Board member. Mr. John Bishop, Farnsworth, district architect. Ms. Leanne .

Embed :
Presentation Download Link

Download Presentation - The PPT/PDF document "Building Project" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.

Building Project






Presentation on theme: "Building Project"— Presentation transcript:

Slide1

Building ProjectCommunity Meeting

Fieldcrest High School

February 18, 2016

7:30 pmSlide2

Introductions

Mr. Tom Barth, Board member

Mr. Greg Kroeschen, Board member

Mr. John Bishop, Farnsworth, district architect

Ms. Leanne

Skuse

, River City, construction managerSlide3

Purpose of Meeting

The purpose of tonight’s meeting is intended to:

Inform the community of where the Board currently stands in regard to a building project

Inform the community of the next steps in the building project

Provide community with opportunity to submit and answer questions

Present options to the community for the building project and feedback on

optionsSlide4

Procedures for tonight

As information is provided tonight, if you have questions, please write the question on a slip of paper and hand to persons collecting questions.

Questions will be answered later in the program, or will be held for answering when it is possible to do so.

Answers to submitted questions will be placed on the district website.Slide5

Recent events

Various conversations and meetings

Meetings with community leaders

Board conclusion that centralized location is not electable at this time

No plans to locate any school building in centralized location for this building project

Also clear that each community with a current building desires to maintain a building in the communitySlide6

Board’s current stance

Whatever the building project turns out to be,

The Board intends that there will be a building located in each town – Minonk, Toluca, & Wenona

There is no impetus toward further discussion of a centralized location with this Board during this building projectSlide7

Information we have so far

Costs for any project will be developed and confirmed by two separate firms

Costs projected for East and HS renovations are near or at the same value of replacement of each

Costs projects for South and West renovations, while expensive, are not nearly as high or close to replacement costsSlide8

Information 2

Plan at this time is to renovate South and West –

current thought is

to use

these buildings for

20-30 more

years

If the cost of renovations reaches 50% of replacement value, then previously grandfathered ADA code, sprinkler code, and storm shelter requirements kick in

Cost of renovations at South and West are not anticipated to approach this limitSlide9

Information 3

Additions to buildings at South and West were completed in 2001/2002, and some concurrent renovations were completed, so less concerns about state of those buildings

Cost

of renovations at East and HS are expected to easily cross the 50% line

Therefore, renovation only of East and HS are not currently under considerationSlide10

Next steps

Next question – what happens at East and HS?

Building Committee is putting forth two options for community consideration and input

Equity across East and HS is a consideration in options presentedSlide11

Option 1 – Build completely new

Build a new building in Minonk and a new building in Wenona

The new buildings would be at sites yet to be determined, but located in Minonk and Wenona

Old buildings would be completely razed

A course of action for the current properties would be developedSlide12

Option 2 – New additions

Build additions to current HS and East buildings

Space for additions is available at each site

Determination would have to be made what parts of buildings are usable with lower cost or no renovations

This would drive what is kept, what is razed, and what is built in the additionsSlide13

Potential obstacles – Option 1

Option 1 – new buildings

Location and cost of land

Utilities connection costs

Connections to public roadways/turn lanes – possible light

signals

– IDOT?Slide14

Potential obstacles – Option 2

Option 2 – additions to current buildings

At East

A

ddition might have to use part of current baseball field – where does baseball field go?

Addition would likely go off end of gym/north corridor – does that cause problems with gym usability during construction?

Outdoor PE?

Need to move/raze bus garage?

Will playground be usable?Slide15

Potential obstacles – Option 2 cont.

At HS

Enough

space for addition, but tight fit while construction happening?

Entryway to the school changes streets?

Parking

lot/bus parking space?

Will

gym be usable during

construction?

Outdoor

PE? Slide16

Complicating factors

Referendum price tag will have to include costs for new building/addition, razing of buildings, any land/utility costs, plus possibly costs for renovation at South/West – complicated project w/4 buildings included

Intent is to spread costs over 20-30 years, but getting another referendum for more work in that time frame is highly unlikely – planning must encompass long-term solutions for South/West buildings that will be in use for 20-30 more years, at leastSlide17

Complicating factors 2

Pressure from decennial health/life safety survey puts a time factor on decision-making process

Most pressing items must be done in approximately one year from approval of survey by ISBESlide18

Referendum/bonding scope

Ballot language will be fairly specific on location(s), project scope, and dollar amount to be bonded

If referendum is approved, what is approved on the ballot is locked in

Bonding based on approved referendum can only be spent on the projects described in the referendumSlide19

Summary

Centralized concept off the table

District seeking direction

Option 1 – new buildings HS and East

Option 2 – additions at HS and East

Renovations at South and West requiredSlide20

Community input

Asking which direction community prefers we develop, as costs for developing two approaches is prohibitive

Impossible at this time to provide anything more than broad scope on either option until approach is developed

Asking for community to provide direction

Option 1 for all new buildings

Option 2 for additions to usable East and HSSlide21

Question session

Hand questions to person collectingSlide22

Community preference

You had the opportunity to pick up a colored dot on arrival

There are two posters in the room – one for Option 1, the other for Option 2

Place your dot on the poster which you would prefer to see the district develop

If you have no preference, you may choose not to place a dot on a poster

Count of choices will be made

Results will be used to direct next stepsSlide23

Reminder

Option 1 – all new buildings for East and High School

Option 2 – additions to current East and High SchoolSlide24

Thank you

Thank you for your input, and have a great evening!