FALL 2018
Lessons in design for K-12
IN Session
Topics and trends for educators and administrators from LaBella’s educational design & engineering team
fall syllabus
Safeguarding Our Schools Why Security Master Planning Should Precede Your Next Project
4
Recapping This Fall’s EdSpaces Conference: All the Talk from Tampa
2
Ready or Not, Here it Comes: Building Condition Surveys
3
Should You Jump in the Pool? What You Need to Know About DASNY Pooled Borrowing vs. Traditional Bonds
7
2
In Session LaBella Associates |
Fall 2018
“PUBLIC OFFICE IS A PUBLIC TRUST.”
SCHOOL IS SAFELY IN SESSION This fall, LaBella was proud to host two live learning seminar for educators. We repeated our Introduction to Capital Projects program (which is especially popular with new and emerging administrators), and hosted a new program focused on school security. Our Capital Projects program is well established, and we can confidently say our presenters are experts, capable of fielding any question. In contrast, school security is a topic where definitive answers seem to be in short supply. As LaBella Project Architect Michael Place thoughtfully writes in our feature article, securing our schools requires input from law enforcement, educators, architects, and the public. We look for any opportunity to listen and learn from these groups, and want to share and build on what we’ve learned as architects. Our commitment is to continually be at the forefront of the role architecture has to play in solving the issue. We hope you will find this issue’s articles relevant and informative. Let us know if there’s a topic we can explore for you by contacting us at insession@labellapc.com.
EdSpaces Conference Sees Surge of Learning Environment Research Billed as “the future of educational facilities”, the annual EdSpaces conference brings designers, K-12 and Higher Ed educators, and furniture and technology vendors together to discuss the latest ideas surrounding educational environments. LaBella’s Project Manager Michael Short attended this year’s conference in Tampa, and shared his key takeaways. For those that have been paying attention to the 1:1 education transition, the ideas at EdSpaces were not out of left field, Short says. Many sessions reiterated the importance of flexible furniture, variety and choice for students, and technology as the first line of instruction. What was noteworthy in each session was the amount of data now available to support these ideas. Pilot programs and single case studies are starting to support larger, more signifcant data pools demonstrating the results of successful implementation. One statistic that stood out to Short was a presentation about the impact seating preferences had on learning outcomes. Research shows that middle and high school students tend to prefer stools and standing height tables, while elementary students prefer rockers and task chairs. One school was able to reduce their behavioral referrals from 600 referrals before active seating was introduced to only 60 afterwards! The same research showed that no group (including primary students, secondary students, or teachers) chose stationary seating when alternatives were offered. We’ll have more research to share in our next issue.
In Session LaBella Associates |
NYSED
Ready or Not, Here It Comes! Building Condition Surveys Are Due in 2020
If you have been through the process in the past you know that the BCS document submitted to NYSED can be, well, less than helpful for planning for your district’s on-going capital work. However, there are ways to make this process result in a supportive and critical document for future capital improvement plans far beyond the five year requirement.
3
based on deficiency conditions and impact to building occupants. This spreadsheet becomes your Five Year Capital Plan. Some typical deliverables include: •
Executive summary
•
Five Year Capital Plan
•
NYSED survey document submission
•
Spreadsheet with anticipated costs referenced to the survey document
The basic Building Condition Survey requires the submission of the NYSED survey document which does little to support your current and future planning needs. Many districts seek additional deliverables from their consultant, and NYSED encourages districts to use the survey process to deepen their understanding of their facility needs.
•
Photographic documentation keyed to spreadsheet & floor plans
•
Full service staff investigation, including architects, MEP, civil, and structural engineers
•
Colored reference plans identifying years of construction, types of flooring, asbestos locations, and types of ceilings
LaBella’s approach is to customize our deliverables to meet your needs. We can prepare and package a great deal of information to make your BCS into a living, usable document that is the foundation of your Five Year and Ten Year Plan. Our approach includes facilities staff interviews and collaboration, to better understand the history of the building and its dayto-day operations. We’ll provide you with a comprehensive spreadsheet that is keyed to the rest of the report. It identifies items, locations, areas, proposed corrective actions and cost estimates. We prioritize items
•
Hazardous material survey, if requested
•
Roof reports
•
Security assessments
•
Mechanical data including unit age, model numbers, manufacturers and filters
•
Arc-Flash hazard surveys
•
ADA accessibility surveys
•
Room by room data sheets
Every five years, all public school districts and Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) in New York State are required to complete a Building Condition Survey (BCS) for student occupied buildings. A Building Condition Survey (BCS) is a visual inspection of all student occupied school buildings conducted by a school district selected team that includes at least one licensed architect or engineer. At a minimum, the survey assesses the current condition of all program spaces, plus major building infrastructure and site features and components. The intent of the survey is to assess these items for evidence of code compliance, deterioration, and structural failure, probable useful life, need for repair and maintenance, and/or need for replacement.
Fall 2018
The above are typically priced per square foot, and many districts choose what they need from an a la carte list. Selecting a BCS consultant now may seem premature, but it will allow for scheduling priority for surveying during the busy summer recess. Don’t hesitate to ask to see a sample report during the selection process.
Districts that have very recently completed significant capital improvements may be eligible for a waiver from the upcoming BCS. But most districts will take the opportunity and funding aid to get a better picture of their facilities and systems.
4
In Session LaBella Associates |
Fall 2018
Feature
Capital Project Planning for Safer School Environments Security Master Planning is about more than adding cameras and locking hardware. It’s a collaborative process that considers threats from terrorism to natural disasters, and develops a balanced, holistic plan to mitigate the risk. By Michael Place, AIA
We encourage all school districts to establish a collaborative team of professionals to engage in the security master planning process prior to the designation of any scope of work or establishment of any capital improvement project budget.
As architects and designers of K-12 schools, LaBella is often asked to address at least some aspect of security within school capital improvement projects. Such requests have become more prevalent in recent years as school security has become a national focus. School districts are attempting to improve the safety of their facilities in an effective and meaningful way; however, many are approaching the process of security enhancement without undertaking the larger task of security master planning. Further, it is often not entirely understood that the “…idea is not that design can definitively protect people from an active shooter or other hazard, but rather that it can discourage such threats or create delays that save lives.”1 Prior to engaging in any security capital improvements, and by extension, investment of tax-payer dollars, school districts must begin to approach the topic of security in a holistic manner.
In Session LaBella Associates |
Security master planning is a collaborative process between administration, design professionals, emergency response and public safety personnel, and the public.
Security master planning is a complex process that involves much more than designing building upgrades and alterations; it is a collaborative process between school district administration, design professionals, emergency response personnel and the public. Generally, this collaboration is founded on identifying threats and vulnerabilities in order to determine the most appropriate methods of protecting people, buildings and other assets. The planning process needs to take place well in advance of any project as “...security elements can be more economically integrated within structures during the early planning and design phases of new construction projects than during subsequent additions or renovations.”2 In general, the planning process for schools is intended to help a school district mitigate damage from four primary threats: terrorism, crime, workplace violence and natural
The implementation of active systems like cameras and panic buttons should be strategically placed to maximize effect and balance cost. Passive systems like visibility around valuable technology are also effective.
disaster. Depending on the local environment surrounding a school or district, there may be a need to focus more specifically on one threat over another. Identifying such priorities requires district administration to work with local authorities and their architect in an open, collaborative way. This collaboration also helps to establish a trusting relationship between those parties, which is essential to any successful project. Conceptually, local authorities will help inform the planning process by offering lessons learned from past events; the architect will guide the process of integrating design and technology, and district administration will offer perspectives on operations. Together the planning team should aim to provide a comprehensive security plan for the district that addresses the aforementioned topics in a transparent way to building users and the public. Public review and comment is always encouraged as part of the transparency of the planning process. Public concerns, whether well-researched or not, are always valid areas of the planning discussion and should be taken into consideration. The planning and design process should be undertaken with a concept of balance in mind; the majority of school environments benefit from a balance of safety, function and
Fall 2018
5
aesthetics. As a team of experienced architects, designers and engineers, LaBella is well versed in the process of addressing security planning in a balanced manner, effectively accounting for future growth, physical characteristics of environments, and design and functional elements of buildings. Too much emphasis on one consideration can leave behind important aspects of another. For example, exterior perimeter fencing is a common element in site security planning. Fencing can be an effective barrier that helps prevent criminal activity; however, in a “…free and democratic society, security must be achieved without resorting to a bunker mentality.”3 There is a balance to be had between erecting a 10-foot chain-link security fence and one that is lower, with more aesthetic appeal. The taller fencing is more difficult to scale and overcome, but presents an austere image of the school to the surrounding neighborhood and community. The shorter fence is easier to overcome, but offers a balance of security and aesthetics that may be a more appropriate image for a community school. Such considerations should to be vetted through the planning process to the point where the district is confident and justified in the approval of all capital improvements. Technology plays an important role in the security planning process. LaBella is often tasked with designing security systems, closed circuit television systems, door access control devices and other “active” technologies as part of capital improvement projects. Additionally, there are a myriad of new building products and systems that offer various degrees of security enhancement; however, the planning process should treat such elements with a balanced approach as well.
Continued on page 6
6
In Session LaBella Associates |
Fall 2018
Security, continued from page 5 Active systems, or those that typically require electrical connections and consistent monitoring, are of great benefit, but add cost to a project. Security cameras, public address systems and panic/active-shooter buttons represent some of the most common active systems available. Their implementation should be carefully considered and their locations strategically identified to maximize effect and balance cost. An over-emphasis and reliance on applied, active technologies can leave behind other important considerations of the physical environment that need to be addressed, including proper site planning, building plan layout, interior environment and school operations and emergency protocols. Passive systems, or those that do not require electrical connection, include everything from the physical school environment (walls, roof, etc.) to window film, signage and first aid kits. The majority of security enhancements are passive systems, and in many cases can easily be incorporated within the design of building renovation projects, if identified early in the planning process. Regardless of passive or active system selection, the evaluation requirements for existing environments remains constant; identifying the type of threat is the primary objective, which allows for an accurate determination of preventative measures to be taken. Working closely with design professionals will ensure a collaborative process by which threats can be identified and properly designed for. A security master planning process will ensure accurate threat determination; provide thorough facility evaluation; identification of facility vulnerabilities and proper security upgrade recommendations.4 LaBella consistently works with district officials to help them navigate the complex
Fall Completion
LaBella’s Michael Place and BOCES 2 Director of Security Christopher Barrow (pictured above) discuss the layered approach to security. For a copy of the presentation visit www.labellapc.com/schools-insession.
security planning process. We encourage all school districts to establish a collaborative team of professionals to engage in the security master planning process prior to the designation of any scope of work or establishment of any capital improvement project budget. Citations 1. Kirk, Mimi. “How Architecture and Design Can Hinder Active Shooters,” Architect, September 2018, pp 79. 2. Nadel, Barbara. Building Security, McGraw-Hill, New York. 2004. pp 2.2. 3. Nadel, pp 2.2 4. Nadel, pp 2.3
Fairport Central School District
was not easily identifiable which posed building access and security concerns.
Capital Improvements at Fairport CSD were recently completed as part of an ongoing initiative to enhance the safety and security of district buildings.
LaBella’s design team relocated the main office to the front of the building and created a new, secured, single point of entry with direct visual control of the entry approach. The entrance is identifiable by a new, prominent pedestrian path focused on a new entry canopy.
At the high school, multiple additions had resulted in essential administrative spaces not being efficiently located. The main entrance
The project added an Events entry point for after hours access to a newly renovated auditorium. Corridor space between the Main and Event entrances was enhanced with new finishes, display cases, lockers and digital displays. To continue to enhance safety, a new parking lot configuration allows for isolation of pick up/drop off lanes from the parking lot.
The secondary Events entrance allows access to after hours facilities like the auditorium and gym while keeping the rest of the school secure.
In Session LaBella Associates |
Fall 2018
7
Funding
Should You Jump In the DASNY Bond Pool? With indications that interest rates may start rising, Districts have been given the option of financing their projects through the Dormitory of the State of New York (DASNY). Here are some considerations. By Steven Ayers, Former Business Official You have worked very carefully with your architect and municipal advisor to ensure that you have maximized the building aid on your project, and confidently submitted your plans to Facilities Planning. So, the question is, have you done everything you can to minimize your local share? The answer is no, you still have an important financing decision to make to manage your aidable interest costs. Making this decision starts with an understanding of how building aid is paid. The formula is your selected building ratio times your assumed amortization. Assumed amortization is calculated by the State as the total aidable cost financed over 15 years at the statewide average interest rate. This is regardless of how you choose
to finance your project, or how much of the cost is paid for through a capital reserve, or other source. Thus, the closer you are to having your actual debt service costs align with your building aid payments, the closer you are to minimizing the local share of the capital project. Traditionally school districts have financed their capital projects by issuing bonds. The interest rate on those bonds is a function of the district’s credit rating and the prevailing interest rate market. If the interest rate is higher than the State prevailing interest rate, then the excess is not aided, increasing the local share. In recent years, districts have been given the option of financing their projects through the Dormitory Authority of the State
of New York (DASNY). Under this arrangement, DASNY creates bond pools through the issuance of their own bonds, and these pools are used to finance district projects. This arrangement has been advantageous to districts with low credit ratings, as they are able to obtain better interest rates as a pooled borrowing. It also offers a potentially significant advantage as DASNY users are guaranteed that the statewide average interest rate will be replaced with their DASNY borrowing rate, thus eliminating the risk of non-aidable interest. This advantage is potentially offset by the DASNY fees generally being significantly larger than local bond issuance costs. With our long period of low interest rates showing signs of coming to an end, the safe harbor of DASNY borrowings being at the DASNY rates and not the statewide interest rate may be sufficient to offset the higher fees. This is a good conversation to have with your municipal advisors as you prepare to move into the long term financing phase of your capital project.
Proposed Thomas Technology Wing Expansion Project A newly proposed $69.5 capital improvement project will be up for a vote by the Webster CSD community on Tuesday, December 11. The project includes renovations and expansion to the technology education wing at Webster Thomas High School, which offers the nationally renowned engineering curriculum Project Lead the Way. The district’s 18 technology courses offer students experiential learning opportunities and the ability to take a break from traditional instruction to get their hands dirty—whether that be with grease from the auto repair class or sawdust from the GeoTech program. Other programs in the expansion project include the district’s award-winning SparX robotics team and 3D printing.
LEARN MORE: Visit our website for more information
ph. (877) 626-6606
www.labellapc.com/schools-in-session
insession@labellapc.com
