upper arlington schools€¦ · our goals for today: • present draft cost estimates associated...

MOODY NOLAN | PERKINS+WILL

UPPER ARLINGTON SCHOOLSBUILDING TEAM MEETING #4UPPER ARLINGTON HIGH SCHOOLMARCH 14-16, 2016

YOURVOICE MATTERS

MOODY NOLAN PERKINS+WILL HILLIARD JEANE KORDA EMH&T MKSK TURNER

2

AffirmGuiding

Principles

PresentFacilitiesAnalysis Findings

Evaluate Master Plan

Options

Evaluate RevisedMasterPlan

Options

CES 1 CES 2 CES 3 CES 4

SEPT 9+10 NOV 18+19 FEB 23+24 APR 19+20

Review Financials

CES 5

TBD 2017

BTM 1

BTM 2

BT SUMMIT

BTM 3

SEP 29–OCT 1

NOV 10-12

DEC 3

JAN 12-14

BTM 4MAR 14-16

OUR PROGRESS

BUILDING TEAM MEETINGSMARCH 14 - 16, 2016

3

AffirmGuiding

Principles

PresentFacilitiesAnalysis Findings

Evaluate Master Plan

Options

Evaluate RevisedMasterPlan

Options

CES 1 CES 2 CES 3 CES 4

SEPT 9+10 NOV 18+19 FEB 23+24 APR 19+20

Review Financials

CES 5

TBD 2017

BTM 1

BTM 2

BT SUMMIT

BTM 3

SEP 29–OCT 1

NOV 10-12

DEC 3

JAN 12-14

BTM 4MAR 14-16

OUR PROGRESS


BTM 5TBD 2017

OUR GOALS FOR TODAY:

• Present draft cost estimates associated with each option

• Present district-wide draft cost estimates

• Review intent of master plan and estimate development

• Review school facilities funding

• Present building team / community feedback

• Group discussions and work session feedback on options

• Next steps


5

Repair + $75,471,000 Renovate + $132,280,000

• 307,461 SF• 1,858 students

• 165 SF / Student• $245 / SF

• 398,177 SF• 1,858 students

• 214 SF / Student• $332 / SF

Note: Costs represent draft estimates of total project costs in 2018 dollars.

• REPAIR EXISTING SPACES PER PHYSICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

• INCLUDES MINIMAL “RIGHT-SIZED” CLASSROOMS

INCLUDES RENOVATED / NEW AND “RIGHT-SIZED”:

• CLASSROOMS AND COLLABORATION SPACE

• ART AND MUSIC CLASSROOMS

• LEARNING CENTER

• GYMNASIUMS AND NATATORIUM

• THEATER

• CAFETERIA/ KITCHEN

• ADMINISTRATION

• FACILITY SUPPORT

UPPER ARLINGTON HIGH SCHOOL

REPAIR + OPTIONUPPER ARLINGTON HIGH SCHOOL

RENOVATE + OPTION

NOTE: WORKING DRAFT CONCEPTUAL DIAGRAMS – NOT A FINAL DESIGN PLANMARCH 14-16, 2016

6

Rebuild A $135,510,000 Rebuild B $140,584,000

• 398,177 SF• 1,858 students

• 214 SF / Student• $340 / SF

• 398,177 SF• 1,858 students

• 214 SF / Student• $353 / SF


INCLUDES NEW AND “RIGHT-SIZED”:



• LEARNING CENTER


• THEATER


• ADMINISTRATION


INCLUDES NEW AND “RIGHT-SIZED”:



• LEARNING CENTER


• THEATER


• ADMINISTRATION


NEW BLEACHERS

NOTE: WORKING DRAFT CONCEPTUAL DIAGRAMS – NOT A FINAL DESIGN PLANMARCH 14-16, 2016

SCHOOL / OPTION REPAIR + RENOVATE + A RENOVATE + B REBUILD A REBUILD B

BURBANK

BARRINGTON

GREENSVIEW

TREMONT

WICKLIFFE

WINDERMERE

HASTINGS

JONES

UAHS

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SESSION #3 FEEDBACK SUMMARYFeedback Received Prior to Draft Cost Estimates


SCHOOL/OPTION REPAIR + RENOVATE + A RENOVATE + B REBUILD A REBUILD B

BURBANK $ 7,293,000 $ 12,657,000 $ 14,807,000

BARRINGTON $ 17,823,000 $ 32,101,000 $31,024,000* $ 32,346,000

GREENSVIEW $ 11,627,000 $ 21,671,000 $ 22,636,000

TREMONT $ 9,507,000 $ 14,906,000 $ 17,467,000

WICKLIFFE $ 11,347,000 $ 23,825,000 $ 23,848,000

WINDERMERE $ 13,283,000 $ 27,514,000 $ 22,181,000 $22,181,000

HASTINGS $ 27,677,000 $ 45,198,000 $ 52,354,000

JONES $ 18,208,000 $ 46,841,000

UAHS $ 75,471,000 $132,280,000 $135,510,000 $140,584,000


* Barrington Renovate + Option B added after feedback from Community Engagement Session #3

DRAFT COST SUMMARY

SCHOOL/OPTION REPAIR + RENOVATE + A RENOVATE + B REBUILD A REBUILD B

BURBANK $ 7,293,000 $ 12,657,000 $ 14,807,000

BARRINGTON $ 17,823,000 $ 32,101,000 $31,024,000* $ 32,346,000

GREENSVIEW $ 11,627,000 $ 21,671,000 $ 22,636,000

TREMONT $ 9,507,000 $ 14,906,000 $ 17,467,000

WICKLIFFE $ 11,347,000 $ 23,825,000 $ 23,848,000

WINDERMERE $ 13,283,000 $ 27,514,000 $ 22,181,000 $22,181,000

HASTINGS $ 27,677,000 $ 45,198,000 $ 52,354,000

JONES $ 18,208,000 $ 46,841,000

UAHS $ 75,471,000 $132,280,000 $135,510,000 $140,584,000


* Barrington Renovate + Option B added after feedback from Community Engagement Session #3

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SESSION #3 FEEDBACK SUMMARYFeedback Received Prior to Draft Cost Estimates

DRAFT COST SUMMARY INCLUDING

WHAT IS A FACILITIES MASTER PLAN?Master Planning Process

PHYSICALASSESSMENT

What physical assets are in need of repair

or replacement?

EDUCATIONALASSESSMENT

How do our facilities support the educational

focus of the District?

FINANCIALASSESSMENT

What are the priorities and

associated costs?


WHAT IS A FACILITIES MASTER PLAN?Master Planning Process

PHYSICALASSESSMENT

What physical assets are in need of repair

or replacement?

EDUCATIONALASSESSMENT

How do our facilities support the educational

focus of the District?

FINANCIALASSESSMENT

What are the priorities and

associated costs?

How can we improve our

physical assets….

FACILITIES MASTER PLAN

….and advance our relentless

focus on learning

….while remaining fiscally

responsible?


What?A long-term strategyA living document

Why?As stewards of Upper Arlington Schools educational and financial resources this process allows you to:

Improve education / educational environmentsReflect what the community valuesPlan for the futureSpend money wisely

WHAT IS A FACILITIES MASTER PLAN?(….and why do it??)


WHAT IS A FACILITIES MASTER PLAN?Guiding Principles

LENS EVALUATION FACILITIESINPUTS

GUIDINGPRINCIPLES


WHAT IS A FACILITIES MASTER PLAN?Guiding Principles

Our district’s educational environments . . .

1) Will champion uniquely accomplished learners

2) Will be fiscally responsible and community responsive

3) Will foster and engage relationships

4) Will bolster collaboration and creativity

5) Will recognize the need to create a safe place to learn and work


Infrastructure: Maintain/update to working order Change uses of existing structure and/or expand to allow better use

New and optimized

Program: Limited or no change Alteration of deficiencies possible Addresses deficiencies

Physical Appearance:

No significant change Change mostly limited to interiors and/or expansion

Completely new

# of Teaching Spaces:

Right-sized spaces added to accommodate year 6 enrollment projection

Right-sized spaces added to accommodate year 6 enrollment projection

Right-sized spaces included to accommodate year 6 enrollment projection

Classroom Loading:

Assumes 25 students per classroom Assumes 25 students per classroom Assumes 25 students per classroom

Core Spaces: Cafeteria/Multi-Purpose Room: Sized to year 10 enrollment projection w/minimum time for lunch (max: three lunches)

Cafeteria/Multi-Purpose Room: Sized to year 10 enrollment projection (two lunches), bleacher seating added to exhibition gym, current 1550 seat theater to be renovated

Cafeteria/Multi-Purpose Room: sized to year 10 enrollment projection (two lunches), 2,500 seat exhibition gym, 3-court practice gym, natatorium, 1550 seat theater

OPTION CATEGORIES (HIGH SCHOOL)

Definitions: Infrastructure: Systems within the building such as power, HVAC, and data network that support the functions of the building.

Program: The size and function of individual spaces throughout the building such as classrooms, faculty offices, gymnasiums, etc.

Right-sized: Individual spaces sized appropriately for the function for which they are intended to perform.

REPAIR + RENOVATE + REBUILD


WHAT IS IN THE TOTAL

COST?

Project Contingencies

Swing Space/Phasing/Safety/Temp. Const.

Project Costs (Construction Costs and Soft Costs)

TOTAL PROJECT COSTS


Infla

tion

18

• Common practice throughout Ohio is issuing bonds

• District has issued bonds in the past – last issuance approximately 20 years ago

• Bonds are similar to home mortgages

• Allows district to spread cost over a period of years

How are facilities projects funded?


19

Bond issue

• Requires approval (vote) of tax payers

• Pay-back period up to 38 years

• Interest rate impacted by bond rating

• Bond rating similar to credit rating• UA Schools’ Standard and Poor’s (S&P) AAA rating – best

possible• Key factors: community support and financial planning


20

Bond example

A district issues bonds in the amount of $100,000,000 for a facilities project and plans to pay them off over 38 years with level principal payments at a 5% interest rate:

Using our current property valuation, with the above variables:• Approximate millage for project would be 3 mills (not 100

mills as some may assume)• 1 mil = $140/yr per $400,000 of auditor’s market

valuation, therefore, 3 mils would equal $420/yrThis is an example to illustrate millage related to bonds. Amounts were chosen for simplicity and are not related to any specific project. Millage is impacted by valuation changes, interest rate at time of issuance and duration of pay-back period. BUILDING TEAM MEETINGS

MARCH 14 - 16, 2016

21

Repair + $75,471,000 Renovate $132,280,000

2.28 Mills / $319.20 per yr. 4 Mills / $560.00 per yr.

Assumptions: • Based upon auditor appraised home value of $400,000• Bonds financed over 38 years at 5% interest with level principal payment structure• No change in district’s total property valuation for 38 years.



REPAIR + OPTIONUPPER ARLINGTON HIGH SCHOOL

RENOVATE + OPTION

NOTE: WORKING DRAFT CONCEPTUAL DIAGRAMS –NOT A FINAL DESIGN PLAN

MARCH 14-16, 2016

22

Rebuild A $135,510,000 Rebuild B $140,584,0004.10 Mills / $574.00 per yr. 4.25 Mills / $595.00 per yr.


NEW BLEACHERS


NOTE: WORKING DRAFT CONCEPTUAL DIAGRAMS –NOT A FINAL DESIGN PLAN

MARCH 14-16, 2016

23

Renovate + $132,280,000

4 Mills / $560.00 per yr.

Repair + $75,471,000

2.28 Mills / $319.20 per yr.Rebuild A $135,510,0004.10 Mills / $574.00 per yr.

Rebuild B $140,584,000

4.25 Mills / $595.00 per yr.



REPAIR + OPTION


RENOVATE + OPTION


REBUILD OPTION A


REBUILD OPTION B



1. What is your reaction to the financial information?

2. Considering the student and staff experience for our school, what building elements should drive our decision making?

3. For our school community, what option (or options) makes the most sense?

4. Considering a district-wide experience for our students and staff, what should drive our decision making?

BUILDING TEAM #4 WORK SESSION


25

Next steps• Building Team feedback used to refine options for Community Engagement

Sessions

• Community Engagement Sessions:Tuesday, April 19 at 7 p.m. at UAHSWednesday, April 20 at 8:30 a.m. at Mountview Christian Church

• Web survey

• Scientific phone survey

• Recommendation to the Board of Education in Fall of 2016

• Additional Building Team Meeting and Community Engagement Session during Decisions Phase

• Ballot issue – November 2017

upper arlington schools€¦ · our goals for today: • present draft cost estimates associated...

Documents