Community Meeting Fieldcrest High School February 18 2016 730 pm Introductions Mr Tom Barth Board member Mr Greg Kroeschen Board member Mr John Bishop Farnsworth district architect Ms Leanne ID: 556096
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.
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!