Community Task Force on Facilities May 20, 2013 Preliminary Report and Recommendations
Independent School District 284 Wayzata Public Schools
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Executive Summary
1
Introduction
2
Purpose
3
Community Task Force Membership
4
Process
5
Resources
6-15
Task Force Discussions
16-18
Recommendations
19-22
Appendix A. Building History B. Capacity Analysis C. Enrollment Projections D. District Organization Options E. Benefits / Challenges F. CMS Conceptual Capacity Increase Diagram G. Districtwide Infrastructure Needs H. Costs Analysis I.
Case Studies
J. Large High Schools / Best High Schools K. Preliminary Tax Impact / Bonding Concept L. List of Needs M. Wayzata High School Conceptual Capacity Increase Diagram N. Taskforce Meeting Minutes
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In February 2013, the Wayzata School Board appointed a 16-member Community Task Force on Facilities comprised of a broad cross section of interests from the Wayzata School District – existing residents, District alumni, new residents, parents, and grandparents. The Task Force’s purpose was to study the effect of District growth on the District’s educational facilities needs over the next 8-10 years and make recommendations to the School Board based on its findings. To accomplish this task, the Task Force analyzed, among other things, current student enrollment, projected enrollment growth, current District facilities capacities, and projected future facilities needs and related costs. The Task Force met five times between March and May 2013, spending 10 hours in large and small group sessions, plus additional individual work outside of the meetings often involving discussions with residents and others not directly working on the Task Force. The discussions were open and honest and, at times, heated, with differing opinions heavily debated – with different Task Force members playing devil’s advocate to probe a position further. As a result of its thorough and deliberate efforts, the Task Force reached consensus on the following recommendations, all of which will be further detailed in this Report, for consideration by the School Board:
1. Build an Addition to the High School to Accommodate Forecasted Population Growth: As its next major building project, the District should build an addition to the High School to accommodate 900 more students, the approximate amount projected. The High School currently exceeds its intended capacity and, based on projected growth, it is forecast to continue to grow beyond capacity by the 2013-14 school year, and remain over capacity by 2017-18 (430 students over), reaching 900 students over capacity by 2020-21 and remain at this higher enrollment level as the District’s available land is built out. This recommended addition to the current High School will allow the District to better accommodate projected resident growth for the next 10 years and beyond. The addition should allow for the current capacity need.
2. Expand Parking and Outdoor Facilities at the High School: As part of the expansion of the High School, there will be a need for additional parking, access and outdoor facilities. The Task Force supports the purchase of the adjacent 36 acres made available by a local developer. Redevelopment of this land should occur to support the needs of District and the community.
3. Move Adults (part of the District Administration) from Central Middle School to Accommodate Expanding Middle School Population: The District should continue to create additional Middle School capacity by moving out the adults at Central Middle School so additional space can be made available for classrooms. Like the High School, the Middle Schools also currently have a pressing need for capacity relief. The Middle Schools are forecast to have an additional capacity need of 173 in 2015 that can be accommodated at Central Middle School. The adults will need to move, as a possible interim step, to the High School in 2015 to allow for this additional capacity.
4. Update Security and Energy Efficiency: The District should continue to seek to improve greeter / secure entrances at affected schools, improve security systems, utilize energy savings arrangements, and upgrade IT network redundancy, all of which will enhance District operations.
5. Update Media Centers and Classroom Space to Meet New Educational Methodologies: The District should upgrade its Media Centers and classroom furniture to support changing learning methodologies and continue the District’s reputation for educational excellence
6. Purchase Additional Land in Preparation for Potential Additional Elementary School Need: To maximize future District flexibility, the District should buy additional land sufficiently sized to build a potential future school north of Highway 55 and within the District boundaries.
7. Prepare for Potential Need for Additional Elementary School: Because the next capacity concern is likely to be the Elementary Schools, the School Board should consider convening another Task Force in the future to study that issue.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 1
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
INTRODUCTION Wayzata School District had been experiencing slight resident enrollment growth over the last ten years. However, during the last five years, enrollment growth has increased substantially. The increased resident student enrollment growth trend is expected to continue through the next decade. The Cities of Plymouth, Maple Grove , Medina and Corcoran all have active development which is converting open land to residential subdivisions and thus both the City and School District project population to continue to grow. The City of Plymouth, City of Medina, Hennepin County and the Metropolitan Council are anticipating the pattern of development to continue in the northern part of the District. The District will also see growth from built in growth from larger class sizes now moving through the elementary and middle grades. The Community Task Force on Facilities was created by the School Board to study the effect of the area’s growth on educational facility needs. This document outlines the findings of the Task Force and its recommendations for facility development.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 2
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
PURPOSE The Community Task Force on Facilities charge was to analyze pertinent information and consider options for future facilities needs out to the school year 2022-23. This Community Task Force on Facilities, which was comprised of a broad cross section of interests from School Distric existing residents, District alumni, new residents, parents, and grandparents were charged with recommending future facility needs for the next 8-10 years. In addition to primary and secondary research, the Task Force had access to District Administration and Staff at each meeting to clarify or provide additional information as requested. What follows is a summary of information, needs and options reviewed by the Community Task Force on Facilities, enabling them to make a recommendation of a facilities plan to the Wayzata Board of Education.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 3
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
COMMUNITY TASK FORCE MEMBERSHIP Community Task Force Members Ted Victor Chris Pierson Cathy Roth Chris McCullough Greg Rye Nancy Moelk KC Chermak Sarah Johansen Darrell Leines Jerry Rotman Jay Willis Karen Arkesteyn Heather Page Gangi Reddy Jayarami Mark Evenson Yugandhar (Yugi) Pattur Resource Personnel Chace Anderson, Superintendent Jim Westrum, Executive Director of Business and Finance Kristin Tollison, Assistant Director of Community Education Amy Parnell, Director of Communications and Community Engagement Jodi Olson, Teacher Union President Cheryl Polzin, School Board Jeff Ridelhoover, Assoc. Principal Wayzata High School Jaime Sherwood, Activities Director Wayzata High School Facilitators Scott McQueen, Wold Architects and Engineers Lynae Schoen, Wold Architects and Engineers
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 4
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
PROCESS The Facilities Task Force met five times between March and May 2013. The meetings were held at Central Middle School. Information was presented at each meeting by various sources on a variety of topics. Demographic and enrollment projections by Hazel Reinhardt Consulting District Administration information - Anticipated District growth information - Class size targets - Additional detail on capacity - Retiring debt - Ability to borrow - T.I.E.S Study preliminary info - Funding concepts - Operating cost analysis Wold Architects and Engineers - Facilitation of Task Force - District Phase I Projects underway - District Phase II Projects underway - District Phase III Needs - Building capacity - District organizational options - Case Studies – High Schools - District infrastructure needs - Education environment opportunities - Facility improvement costs / concepts After the process of information gathering, much of the Task Force’s time was spent in large (and some small) group discussions. This Report is a result of the Task Force’s exhaustive efforts to gain consensus on the District’s upcoming facilities needs and to recommend to the School Board facility solutions to be included in an upcoming bond referendum, and also intended for the School Board, District Administration and others to use as a planning tool to resolve growth issues into the future.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 5
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
RESOURCES This District’s ability to accurately plan future facility needs is dependent on the quality of its demographic information and enrollment projections. Because it is difficult to forecast exact enrollment, the District must anticipate and be prepared to adjust to unexpected changes. The information must be accurate enough to allow the District to develop facilities appropriately. These enrollment projections were critical in ensuring that we not build more than is needed nor inappropriately prepare resulting in a shortage of educational space and the need to go back to our constituency multiple times over a short period in order to support the funding needed for multiple facility amendments over the next ten years. For these reasons and others, the Task Force spent time analyzing, challenging and discussing resource materials from multiple sources in the process of developing their recommendations.
A. Information from Hazel Reinhardt on Demographic Projections A demographic study was prepared by Hazel Reinhardt Consulting. The report projected enrollment to 2022. Four main statistical projections were prepared. A graph of those projections is included below. The full report can be found in Appendix C. The demographic projections report was a central part of the Task Force’s discussion. All four methods predict significant residential growth in the District over the next 10 years as summarized in the figures provided immediately below.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 6
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
Actual
Actual
Year
2010-11
2011-12
2014-15
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
2019-20
2020-21
2021-22
2022-23
Kdgn
743
620
704
667
682
701
698
710
740
774
778
783
787
Grade 1
791
816
715
799
759
776
797
794
808
842
881
885
891
Grade 2
760
835
827
745
835
793
811
834
830
845
880
921
926
Grade 3
738
764
863
860
774
870
827
846
869
866
881
918
960
Grade 4
805
772
785
904
900
810
914
869
889
913
909
925
964
Grade 5
804
756
790
804
927
923
830
938
892
912
938
934
950
Grade 6
812
856
861
834
846
979
974
876
993
945
967
994
989
Grade 7
807
836
879
892
864
875
1,014
1,008
907
1,030
981
1,003
1,031
Grade 8
795
808
859
896
909
881
891
1,034
1,028
925
1,052
1,001
1,024
Grade 9
802
809
815
879
917
931
901
911
1,058
1,052
946
1,077
1,026
Grade 10
821
797
822
816
880
918
932
903
913
1,060
1,054
948
1,080
Grade 11
777
820
781
820
814
878
916
930
900
910
1,057
1,051
945
Grade 12
789
725
797
758
796
790
851
887
900
872
883
1,024
1,018
10,244
10,214
10,498
10,673
10,903
11,124
11,357
11,540
11,728
11,947
12,206
12,464
12,592
From 810,304 2011 Student Change
10,422
10,496
10,561
10,669
10,777
10,881
10,939
10,967
10,997
11,060
11,060
11,060
-30
284
175
230
221
233
183
188
219
260
258
128
Percent Change
-0.29%
2.78%
1.66%
2.16%
2.03%
2.09%
1.61%
1.63%
1.86%
2.17%
2.11%
1.02%
Total
10/1/2012 Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected 2012-13 2013-14
K-5
4,641
4,563
4,684
4,778
4,877
4,873
4,878
4,991
5,028
5,152
5,267
5,366
5,478
8-2011
4,641
4,647
4,653
4,702
4,746
4,682
4,593
4,625
4,625
4,625
4,625
4,625
4,625
6-8
2,414
2,500
2,599
2,622
2,619
2,734
2,879
2,918
2,928
2,900
2,999
2,998
3,045
8-2011
2,432
2,503
2,586
2,587
2,555
2,635
2,788
2,814
2,748
2,658
2,698
2,698
2,698
9-12
3,189
3,151
3,215
3,273
3,407
3,517
3,600
3,631
3,771
3,895
3,940
4,100
4,069
8-2011
3,247
3,272
3,258
3,271
3,369
3,459
3,500
3,500
3,594
3,715
3,736
3,736
3,736
District Wide 14,000 12,206 12,464 12,592 11,357 11,540 11,728 11,947 11,124 10,903 10,673 12,000 10,244 10,214 10,498 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0
Note: This projection model is a combination of Hazel Reinhardt Consulting’s “Hi Kindergarten / Hi Migration” projection and Wayzata Schools current non-resident population, which is currently aging out of the system.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 7
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
High School 9-12 5,000 4,000 3,189 3,000 2,000 1,000 0
3,151
3,215
3,517
3,407
3,273
3,600
3,631
3,771
3,895
3,940
4,100
4,069
Middle Schools 6-8 4,000 3,045 2,599 2,622 2,619 2,734 2,879 2,918 2,928 2,900 2,999 2,998 3,000 2,414 2,500 2,000 1,000 0
Elementary K-5 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0
4,641
4,563
4,684
4,778
4,877
4,873
4,878
4,991
5,028
5,152
5,267
5,366
5,478
2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 Note: This projection model is a combination of Hazel Reinhardt Consulting’s “Hi Kindergarten / Hi Migration” projection and Wayzata Schools current non-resident population, which is currently aging out of the system.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 8
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
B. Phase I: Information Regarding the District’s Alternative Facilities Reinvestment Plan Wold presented highlights of the District’s Alternative Facilities reinvestment plan. In 2011, the District qualified for the State’s Alternative Facilities program which is a special funding authority for the purpose of providing funds to maintain existing school facilities. The District has an approved 10-year plan which will replace deteriorated components of its buildings. Each year the District is completing approximately $10 million in projects. C. Phase II: Information Explaining Elementary School Capacity Needs and Solutions Underway Wold presented information regarding the Board’s planning over the last 3 years to address Elementary School capacity needs. Projects are underway for additions to Oakwood, Greenwood, and Sunset Hill that will meet the needs of the projected K-5 enrollment growth, replace support space currently being used for classroom instruction lost due to current overcrowding, and provide additional space for Extended Day Kindergarten. The additional capacity will be available by the start of 2013-14 school year. These additions are combined with the attendance boundary changes to create the necessary space in each of the District’s seven Elementary Schools. D. Building Capacity Analysis vs. Enrollment Projections Wold studied the capacities of existing District school buildings and compared those capacities with current and projected enrollments as determined by Hazel Reinhardt Consulting. Capacity analyses of each building level can be found in Appendix B. Note: current capacities are based on how District buildings are currently being utilized for the 2012-13 school year based on the District’s October 1, 2012 enrollment. E.
Housing / Growth Information (from Jim Westrum, Executive Director of Business and Finance, Wayzata School District) Jim Westrum shared some information of recent developments in the District’s growth. The City of Plymouth has been growing in the northern part of the District. Jim shared information about likely development trends into the future which show continued growth in the north. Development and population growth have increased significantly over the last two years. The 2010 US census population for the District was 58,589 residents; in 2013 the population for the District increased by nearly 1,500 to 60,017 residents. The pace of growth is expected to be somewhat faster as the economy makes development more favorable.
F.
District Phase III Needs Identified Thus Far The Task Force was given a draft list of needs that has been developed over the past 2 years by both District Administration and the Facilities Committee of the School Board. Throughout its five meetings, this “list of needs” was discussed and debated among the Task Force. Estimated costs for each line item were also shared. In the end, the Task Force was able to reach consensus on the recommendations presented in this Report, in large part, because of the time spent thoroughly debating the priorities for each line item on the “list of needs” and whether each was truly a “need”, as opposed to a “want”.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 9
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
G. District Organizational Options Wold presented six optional District building / grade organization configurations that had been discussed previously with District Administration. They represent a variety of ways to accommodate the projected increase in enrollment: 1. Option A: High School Addition –maintain K-5 / 6-8 / 9-12 a. 2015/16 – Move adults out of Central Middle School for additional Middle School student capacity b. 2015/16 – 900 capacity addition to high school complete, consider having adults move into expanded High School as potential interim step due to the temporary availability of capacity. c. 2019/20 - Adults move to a separate facility – location TBD 2. Option B: Second High School- maintain K-5 / 6-8 / split to (2) 9-12 a. 2015/16– Move adults out of CMS for additional MS student capacity. b. 2015/16 – New 1,300 capacity high school built, adults potentially move to original high school due to the temporary available capacity. 3. Option C: 4th Middle School, Grade Shift to K-5/6-9/10-12 a. 2015/16– Move adults out of CMS for additional MS student capacity. b. 2015/16 – New 1,000 capacity middle school built, adults potentially move to high school as a potential interim step due to the temporary availability of capacity. c. 2021/22 – Adults move a separate facility – location TBD 4. Option D: 8th Elementary School, Grade Shift to K-6/7-9/10-12 a. 2015/16 – Move adults out of CMS for additional MS student capacity. b. 2015/16 – Two 718 capacity elementary schools built, adults move to high school as a potential interim step due to to the temporary availability of capacity. c. 2021/22 – Adults move a separate facility – location TBD 5. Option E: 9th Grade Center, Grade Shift to K-5/6-8/9/10-12 a. 2015/16 – Move adults out of CMS for additional MS student capacity. b. 2015/6 – New 1,000 capacity 9th grade building complete, adults into 9th grade building as a potential interim step due to the available capacity c. 2021/22 – Adults move a separate facility – location TBD 6. Option F: 12th Grade Center, High School Addition-maintain K-5 / 6-8 / 9-12/ add12 a. 2015/16 – Move adults out of CMS for additional MS student capacity. b. 2015/16 – New 500 capacity 12th grade building (for half of the 12th grade in the morning and half in the afternoon) complete, adults move to current high school as a potential interim step due to the temporary availability of capacity. c. 2021/22 – Adults move a separate facility – location TBD The Task Force discussed each of the options to better understand the effects on the District. The only options which preserve the District’s preferred grade organization of K5/6-8/9-12 were options A,B, and F. The Task Force spent significant time detailing the differences between Options A and B.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 10
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
“Ideal” Grade Organization considerations The issue of the “ideal” grade organization based upon academic / educational considerations was a particularly important discussion point made by District Administration. There are a number of meaningful differences to the current 9-12 configuration: 1. It places 9th graders with 10-12th graders to create a true four year High School experience. 2. Most experts agree that 9th graders are developmentally more like 10th graders than like 8th graders. 3. It allows 9th graders access to 10-12th grade coursework. 4. It matches Minnesota Department of Education structure for High School credits. There are also similar benefits to the current 6-8th grade Middle school configuration: 1. It places 6th graders with 7-8th graders to offer a three year stable environment during adolescent development. 2. Most experts agree that 6th graders are developmentally more like 7th graders than like 5th graders. 3. Most 6th graders are ready for a school experience beyond a elementary classroom. There are benefits to the current K-5 / 6-8 / 9-12 District grade organization as a whole: 1. It minimizes transitions from one building community to the next. Research shows that these transitions can be disruptive to academic progress. 2. It provides families the time at their school building to establish relationships with District staff and administration. These relationships form the team that supports and guides a student’s education. 3. It fits with child development research which supports these groupings. The Task Force found these discussions particularly compelling in light of the potential for facilities decisions to affect this “ideal”. It was also noted that the District studied grade configuration and established this current grade configuration when the “new” High School was constructed almost two decades ago. The Task Force confirmed that the “ideal” grade configuration should remain in place throughout future facilities development.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 11
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
H. Information on Large High Schools Based on the information the Task Force reviewed, when it became apparent to the Task Force that there was a high likelihood of needing capacity for 900 additional students at the current High School, the Task Force requested information about other large high schools throughout the US. It was important for the Task Force to gain an understanding as to what extent other large high schools existed, where they were located, and how the students at those schools performed academically. The Task Force was aware of possible District and community perception that the existing High School is already “too big” and that adding another 900 students would create a “mega school”. As it did with other tough topics, the Task Force discussed and debated this issue at great length. In the end, the Task Force was able to get sufficiently comfortable with the success of other large US high schools to make the recommendations contained in this Report. (See Appendix J for additional information) I.
Information Regarding School District Debt and Ability to Borrow. The District’s financial consultant, Ehlers and Associates, prepared a sample debt schedule which indicated the District’s current debt payment and retirement schedule. In addition there was information on the District’s Alternative Facilities reinvestment program and the potential for a Bond issue for facilities in 2013. The District is retiring a significant amount of debt in the next 4 years which would effectively minimize the taxpayer impact if the District issued additional debt. The District’s Bond rating of AAA+ is the highest of any Minnesota School District. Other information such as Bond interest rates being at historical low make a compelling case for the timing of the needed improvements recommended in this Report. (See Appendix K for additional information)
J.
Case Studies on “Decision to go From One High School to Two” The Task Force requested information on case studies of other school districts that have made the decision to go from one high school to two. Wold provided information on nine school districts in Minnesota that made the decision to shift to a two high school model. The Task Force learned about the four school districts that most recently built a second high school (Lakeville, Chaska, Elk River, and Shakopee). Other case study information was provided that identified school districts that had two or more high schools of unequal sizes. Of the 11 identified school districts in Minnesota, only the Elk River and Rosemount/Apple Valley/Eagan Schools have significantly unequal high school sizes (excluding Minneapolis and Saint Paul). (See Appendix I for additional information)
K. Information on Conceptual Expansion of Wayzata High School Wold presented information developed with District Administration and High School leadership on what a 900 student addition and an enlarged High School campus might look like. These conceptual diagrams were developed to test such a concept and identify needs related to that potential option. Identified components included a new 566 car parking lot (required by city ordinance based on the increased number of students), additional roadway access to the site, classroom, lab,music, performance, and physical education additions, plus expansions to core facilities, special services and administrative space. As the High School is currently four stories, a similar 4-story addition to the east was determined to be an efficient location for classrooms and other additions at each part of the school that increases capacity and continues to zone the school by activity and age group. KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 12
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
The Task Force agreed that the conceptual diagrams presented seemed logical in that there was expansion of the classrooms / labs, the theatre arts area, sports / PE facilities, and – perhaps most importantly – the common areas including the cafeteria and parking lots. There was also important recognition of the future widening of Peony Lane and the importance of using the High School expansion as an opportunity to increase driving safety by providing more access to the High School campus. (See Appendix M for additional information) L.
Information on Benefits / Potential Challenges to One Large High School vs. a Second Smaller High School The Task Force reviewed information contained in the resources that illustrated both benefits and potential challenges to both one large High School and the option of a second smaller High School. (note: the Task Force agreed that enrollment projections would not support two 3,200 student capacity High Schools, and thus a second High School would by necessity be significantly smaller than the current one) The following are highlights of that discussion: a. Benefits of One Large High School: - Quantity and quality of course offerings - Efficient operating costs - Academic achievement (Wayzata High School ranked #5 in Minnesota in a recent national ranking) - Exposure to a broad palette of activities - 36 varsity sports (maximum per MSHL) - Vibrant intramurals - One unified community b. Potential Challenges of One High School: - Perceived negatives of large school environment - Limited roster spots in 7 of the 36 varsity sports - Congestion/concentration of students - Limited growth potential c. Benefits of a Second (Smaller) High School: - Smaller school environment - Separate identity (“Spartans”?) - More varsity spots - Could allow for future growth - Potential community choice d. Potential Challenges of a Second (Smaller) High School: - Achievement differential - Establishing an attendance boundary - Managing equity between both schools - Operating costs/duplication - Managing socio-economic and minority balance - Managing enrollment transfer between schools - Sports/activities participation/dividing up the talent. - Promoting healthy rivalries - Split community (Trojans vs. “Spartans”) (A full document on benefits/potential challenges is included in Appendix E.)
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 13
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
The bottom line for the Task Force was that size provides opportunity – mainly educational / academic opportunity. The Task Force did recognize that expanding the existing High School might result in people leaving for a number of reasons – e.g., varsity sports, negative perception of “mega high school”, etc.), but also recognized that many of those reasons are misperceptions. Increased enrollment with expanded capacity allows the District to maintain desirable class sizes that are consistent with staffing guidelines. M.
Information on Conceptual Capacity Increase of Central Middle School Wold presented a Middle School capacity expansion study developed with District Administration and Central Middle School leadership that creates additional student capacity at Central Middle School by moving out some adults (District Administration) and converting this space back into classrooms. Portions of this phased plan began informally in anticipation of the 2012-13 school year. Subsequent phases in 2013-14 add an additional 129 student capacity. A phase contemplated for fall of 2017-18 adds another 173 student capacity. Implemented, this brings the Central Middle School capacity to 1,339 students and the District-wide Middle School capacity to 2,898 students. The Task Force reviewed this plan in comparison to projected 6-8 grade enrollment. It appears to meet the needs of Middle School for at least the next 7-10 years. The Task Force also observed that Central Middle School is quite a large facility as it was previously the District’s High School and there is plenty of room for easy expansion. It seems like the most prudent way to accommodate projected enrollment increases. (See appendix F for the study)
N.
Information on District-Wide Infrastructure Needs The Task Force received information on a variety of District-wide infrastructure needs addressing: - Improved greeter / secure entrances - Energy savings upgrade opportunities - Technology infrastructure/redundancy These are areas needing periodic upgrades to support daily District operations. The Task Force was supportive of district-wide investment in enhancement of facility security, energy efficiency, and network infrastructure needs. These are vital to the success of District operations and addressing these needs will directly support the mission of Wayzata Schools. (See Appendix G for additional information)
O. Information on 21st Century Learning based Media Centers and Classrooms The Task Force was presented with information on 21st Century preparedness, as developed by District Administration in conjunction with Wold. The discussions and supporting information focused on 2 areas of the educational environment: - Media Centers - The Classroom
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 14
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
In both cases, the future calls for greater flexibility and a technology-infused environment. A variety of upgrades were contemplated which directly support the mission of Wayzata Schools. In the case of Media Centers, the District is currently constructing a pilot for the future Elementary Media Center at Oakwood Elementary, to open in the fall of 2013. Some of the concepts implemented at the Elementary level are also applicable when contemplating changes at the Middle School- and High School-level media spaces. These are large space “assets” at each school building and they are an area under transformation. Upgrades contemplated would directly support this transformation. The future of the classroom will be an infusion of technology and flexibility. Less about lecturing to rows of students, the environment will change to a more dynamic activity space that will serve a variety of arrangements and groupings based on daily changing activities and students’ needs. Key changes to the classroom would be furniture that could move to support the learning process. While the Task Force agreed on the need for 21st Century media space, they did not come to consensus regarding if all classroom furniture needed to be upgraded. P.
Information on Artificial Turf and Field Lighting The Task Force reviewed information on potential improvements to athletic fields which enhance safety and extend use. District co-curricular activities and Community Youth groups are very interested in additional field capacity and the enhanced safety and weather predictability that artificial turf provides. It was recognized that the current campus is fully utilized and the additional 900 students at the High School may require field upgrades to extend use and meet site capacity needs. While the Task Force agreed on the need for two additional fields, the Task Force did not come to consensus on the need for those fields to be turf.
Q. Information on Elementary School Capacity vs. Enrollment The Task Force reviewed information on Elementary School capacity vs. enrollment. It was clear that when considering the highest enrollment projections, Elementary School capacity need appears to be eight years out. The Task Force understood that the District has already initiated additions at three sites to increase Elementary School capacity. The future need as projected led the Task Force to recommend that land for future school development be included as a priority. It is a good time to buy land for the future – rates are low, and land is reasonably priced. If the District chooses not to develop the land in 6, 8, or 10 years, based on current land values, it is believed that the District should be able to sell the land without a loss and potentially a gain.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 15
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
TASK FORCE DISCUSSIONS The Task Force spent several meetings reviewing and discussing the resource materials prior to embarking on their task. Many options to accommodate growth in the District over the next 8-10 years were considered. As a framework for the discussion, the Task Force reached consensus on the following needs and considerations A. Identified “Needs” List: Planning should follow Hazel Reinhardt Consulting’s “high / high” resident enrollment projections because it provides worst-case scenarios to allow facility planning to be ready for maximum potential student population. (High Kindergarten/High Migration, plus the addition of existing non-resident students which are aging out of the system-see charts on pages 7 and 8). High School and Middle School capacity needs must be addressed immediately for the 2015 school year. Middle school capacity need to be addressed as well. District infrastructure needs (upgrades to security,energy efficiency, technology infrastructure). 21st Century preparedness. Facilities upgrades for excellence (artificial turf, gymnastics gym, etc). Elementary School capacity may need to be addressed in 8-10 years (not likely before). Maintaining excellence in academics. (See Appendix L for full list of potential needs) B. Other Considerations Identified: Maintaining grade configurations as K-5/6-8/9-12. Any changes are not a preferred strategy from an acemic perspective. Minimizing transitions. Time table for expanded High School capacity is approximately 2 years from time of bond referendum, through design and construction beginning in spring of 2014, and opening in fall of 2015.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 16
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
C. Cost Analysis The “Needs” Costs The Task Force received information regarding cost ranges for each component of the “needs” list as a guide to their deliberations. These cost ranges were developed by Wold with a cost estimating consultant as part of an analysis of the potential expansion diagrams for 900 student capacity additions to Wayzata High School and the creation of additional capacity at Central Middle School. Other cost ranges were developed with input from District Administration. The Comparison Costs: The Task Force requested a comparison of costs as it related to the two options under discussion: 1. An addition to Wayzata High School to bring the school to a capacity of 4,100 students. 2. The development of a second smaller High School (such that the combined capacity would be 4,100 students). Wold worked with District Administration to develop the analysis from a variety of perspectives. -First cost differences(site purchase, building construction, equipping, development costs, etc). -Annual operating cost differences (utilities, equipment leases, insurance, etc). -Annual staffing cost differences (principals vs assistant principal, activities director vs. activities coordinator, etc. -Annual transportation cost differences. The Cost Analysis Summary: 1. First cost: the addition is likely somewhat more expensive, estimate $1.258 million. 2. Annual Operating Costs: The 2nd High school is more expensive, estimate $615,832 annually. 3. Over 20 years: The additional operating costs could exceed $12 million (in Today’s $$) 4. Operating Costs are often an important differentiator when looking long term. The Task force agreed that annual operating cost is a very important consideration in facilities planning as those operating funds come from the District’s general fund which is the same fund that supports the classroom. While costs were an important part of the discussions, they were not a sole driver of the Task Force decision making. D. Potential Solutions: The Task Force discussed the possible solutions to increasing capacity and appropriately housing students. A number of options to accommodate growth in the District over the next 8-10 years were considered. Options were developed and then explored in detail. Planning charts were reviewed that compared types of facilities against capacity and enrollment projections. These planning charts enabled analysis on the fit, impact, and timing of the various options. The Task Force discussed numerous options conceptually. The following list summarizes the options considered: OPTION A:
High School Addition – K-5 / 6-8 / 9-12
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 17
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
OPTION B:
Second High School – K-5 / 6-8 / (2) 9-12
OPTION C1:
4th Middle School/Grade Shift – K-5 / 6-9 / 10-12
OPTION C2:
8th Elementary/Grade Shift – K-6 / 7-9 / 10-12
OPTION C3:
9th Grade Center – K-5 / 6-8 / 9 / 10-12
OPTION D:
Senior Center and High School Addition – K-5 / 6-8 / 9-12 / 12
E. Option Selection Discussion The Task Force evaluated these six options and measured them against the identified needs, economic and political realities, and the short- and long-term effects on the District. Based on the available information, the Task Force concluded that the long-term growth of the District may persist after the 8-10 year planning horizon. There will be future steps to address facility needs that will be developed by later task forces. At first examination the most pressing capacity need in the District is space at the High School and also across the Middle Schools. The enrollment for 9th grade through 12th grades will exceed 4,000 students within the next 8-10 years and 6th grade through 8th grade enrollment will exceed 3,000 students within the same 8-10 year planning window. The Task Force investigated options to provide capacity for an additional 900 students at the High School. The Task Force also investigated expansion of the Middle Schools to accommodate 400 additional students. The Task Force reached consensus that the District’s preferred organization for the grade level splits would continue to be: Preferred Grade organization
K-5 / 6-8 / 9-12 Keeping grades 9-12 at the current High School will require a facility response within the next two years. The Task Force discussed the various options including expanding the existing High School beyond 3,200 students. This would accommodate the anticipated students for the 10year planning horizon, the grade 9-12 population is expected to grow beyond 4,000 students in potentially 8 years There was broad consensus among the Task Force that planning for a single High School facility for 4,100 students was the best direction for the District. A second, smaller high school is not the best fit for the District's long-term future. In order to accommodate the anticipated additional enrollment at the Middle Schools, the Task Force examined plans for creating additional classroom space at Central Middle School by relocating the adults who are currently officed there. Central Middle School can be expanded within its existing campus, and it is fiscally more prudent to do that than to build additions elsewhere. In order to bridge the gap until the High School can be expanded, the Task Force recommends the District begin working on “temporary” capacity at Central Middle School to house a portion of the Middle Schools population. This temporary facility capacity will be needed for the foreseeable future. This Task Force’s support for the continuation of the District’s preferred grade organization was based upon the academic and educational benefits discussed by the Administration. (See Section D “District Organization Options.”) KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 18
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
RECOMMENDATIONS To meet enrollment growth needs while properly utilizing current District facilities, the Task Force recommends that: 1.
Build an Addition to the High School to Accommodate Forecasted Population Growth: As its next major building project, the District should build an addition to the High School to accommodate 900 more students, the approximate amount projected. The High School currently exceeds its intended capacity and, based on projected growth, it is forecast to continue to grow beyond capacity by the 2013-14 school year, and remain over capacity by 2017-18 (430 students over), reaching 900 students over capacity by 2020-21 and remain at this higher enrollment level as the district’s available land is built out. This recommended addition to the current High School will allow the District to better accommodate projected resident growth for the next 10 years and beyond. The addition should allow for the current capacity need.
2. Expand Parking and Outdoor Facilities at the High School: As part of the expansion of the High School, there will be a need for additional parking, access and outdoor facilities. The Task Force supports the purchase of the adjacent 36 acres made available by a local developer. Redevelopment of this land should occur to support the needs of District and the community. 3. Move Adults (part of the District Administration) from Central Middle School to Accommodate Expanding Middle School Population: The District should continue to create additional Middle School capacity by moving out the adults at Central Middle School so additional space can be made available for classrooms. Like the High School, the Middle Schools also currently have a pressing need for capacity relief. The Middle Schools are forecast to have an additional capacity need of 173 in 2015 that can be accommodated at Central Middle School. The adults will need to move, as a possible interim step, to the High School in 2015 to allow for this additional capacity. 4. Update Security and Energy Efficiency: The District should continue to seek to improve greeter / secure entrances at affected schools, improve security systems, utilize energy savings arrangements, and upgrade IT network redundancy, all of which will enhance District operations. 5. Update Media Centers and Classroom Space to Meet New Educational Methodologies: The District should upgrade its Media Centers and classroom furniture to support changing learning methodologies and continue the District’s reputation for educational excellence 6. Purchase Additional Land in Preparation for Potential Additional Elementary School Need: To maximize future District flexibility, the District should buy additional land sufficiently sized to build a potential future school north of Highway 55 and within the District boundaries. 7.
Prepare for Potential Need for Additional Elementary School: Because the next capacity concern is likely to be the Elementary Schools, the School Board should consider convening another Task Force in the future to study that issue.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 19
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
May 20, 2013
Page 20
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
Proposed Costs The cost of facility development is estimated below. The Task Force recommends that the School Board begin preparing for a successful referendum. Based on the ability of the schools to accommodate the anticipated students, the Task Force advises that the High School addition and additional capacity at Central Middle School should be planned to be available for students immediately, but no later than the 2015-16 school year. High School Capacity Needs (Additional Capacity 900 Students) Scope assumptions: 4,100 Student Total High School Capacity (900 student addition) Increase Core Size: Cafeteria / Auditorium lobby / Commons Additional Classroom Capacity 900 additional students Classrooms (32 classrooms and labs) Support Spaces Additional Music Capacity (1) Rehearsal space Additional P.E. / Co-Curricular Capacity (2) Multi-purpose spaces / (2) Locker Rooms Gymnasium (2 Stations) Site development of 36 adjacent acres Capacity: Additional Land Adjacent to High School Campus (Portion of Former Elm Creek Golf Course– 36 Acres) Increase Capacity/Safety: Another Site Entrance to High School / Roadways Increase Capacity: Expanded Parking / Relocation of Tennis, etc. (566 Additional Stalls) Increase Capacity: Development of New Fields / Replace Lost Fields Site purchase included in these cost estimates Costs: Vote Nov. 2013
Bid 2014
Potential Project Cost:
$66,220,000
(open Phase I Fall 2015) (open Phase II Winter 2015/16)
Middle School Capacity Needs (at Existing Central Middle School Building Conversion of Space) Scope assumptions: Existing building 203,500 S.F. Increase Capacity (Reallocate/remodel CMS space) Interim Step: Move adults out of CMS (to WHS Addition) Future Step: Move adults out of WHS (to available or new space within the district TBD) 173 student additional Student Capacity 26,000 S.F. rebuild and reconfiguration Limited Site development, only at front entry Locker Room Upgrades at Central Middle School Parking/Entrance: MS/Family Learning Center Costs: Vote Nov. 2013
Bid 2014
Potential Project Cost:
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
$5,500,000
Page 21
(MS Space open Fall 2015)
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
District-wide Infrastructure Needs Scope assumptions: Improved Greeter/Secure Entrances Elementary Schools (match Oakwood/Gleason Lake Model) Security Systems Upgrade Middle Schools (match Elementaries) Energy Savings Upgrade Opportunities (Leverage Alt. Facilities) Technology Infrastructure and Fiber Optic Redundancy Costs: Vote Nov 2013
Potential Project Cost:
Bid 2014
$16,225,000
(Phased completion)
Facility Upgrades for Excellence Task Force discussions without concensus: Consider High School Music / Performance Expansion / Small Theatre Consider Extended Use Synthetic Grass (2 fields at High School) Consider Light existing Fields (2 practice fields?) Consider High School Stadium Bathrooms Consider High School Gymnastics Needs/Additional M.S. Gym Station Costs: Vote Fall 2013
Potential Project Cost:
$13,685,000
(Phased completion)
Preparedness Needs: 21st Century Learning Scope assumptions and discussions: District-wide Media Center Retrofits Elementary Schools (match Oakwood Model) Middle Schools High School Enhance Instruction: District-wide Classroom Retrofits Consider Classroom Furniture- discussion without concensus Classroom Technology Costs: Vote 2013
Potential Project Cost:
$6,600,000$17,400,000
(Purchase: TBD)
Future Elementary Capacity: Land Only Scope assumptions: Similarly sized site as required for an Elementary School Adequately sized for site development for parking and small outdoor play Only site purchase included at this time. Costs: Vote 2013
Potential Project Cost:
$4,200,000
(Purchase: TBD)
In addition, the Task Force recognized that additional capacity beyond these improvements may potentially be needed within 8-10 years. The Task Force suggests that enrolment growth and educational requirements be monitored and another Task Force be assembled to update this plan at the appropriate time.
KL/ISD_284/102131/Comm.Taskforce/Wayzata Facility Needs Rpt
Page 22
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
APPENDIX A – BUILDING HISTORY DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING FACILITIES The District programs are housed in thirteen (13) facilities: seven (7) Elementary Schools, three (3) Middle Schools, and a High School. The District currently owns an additional piece of property (approximately 16 Acres), too small for typical future development. Birchview Elementary Year Constructed - 1969 (Add. – 1995) Square Footage – 59,720 S. F. School Site Size – 14 acres Levels – One (1) Gleason Lake Elementary Year Constructed - 1988 Square Footage – 80,710 S. F. School Site Size – 22 acres *includes Administration Building Levels – Two (2) Greenwood Elementary Year Constructed - 1964 (Additions in 1964, 1986, 1989, 199, and 2000) Square Footage – 72,007 S. F. School Site Size – 29 acres Levels – One (1) Kimberly Lane Elementary Year Constructed - 1991 Square Footage – 83,000 S. F. School Site Size – 21 acres Levels – One (1) Oakwood Elementary Year Constructed - 1957 (Additions in 1992) Square Footage – 66,591 S. F. School Site Size – 40 acres *includes Central Service Facility Levels – One (1) Plymouth Creek Elementary Year Constructed - 1988 Square Footage – 80,786 S. F. School Site Size – 19.5 acres Levels – One (1 ) Sunset Hill Elementary Year Constructed -1963 (Add. - 1989) Square Footage – 64,983 S. F. School Site Size – 20.3 acres Levels – One (1)
Wayzata High School Year Constructed - 1997 Square Footage – 487,000 S. F. School Site Size – 163 acres Levels – Four (4) Central Middle Year Constructed - 1960 (Additions in 1962, 1964, 1968, 1973, 1989) Square Footage – 308,568 S. F. School Site Size – 65 acres Levels – Two (2) East Middle Year Constructed - 1967 (Additions in 1980) Square Footage – 146,111 S. F. School Site Size – 40 acres Levels – Two (2) West Middle Year Constructed - 1949 (Additions in 1968 and 1989) Square Footage – 167,000 S. F. School Site Size – 35.5 acres Levels – Two (2) Administration Building Year Constructed - 1969 Square Footage – 8,600 S. F. School Site Size – *See Gleason Lake Levels – One (1)
Central Services Facility Year Constructed - 1983 Square Footage – 21, 205 S. F. School Site Size- *See Oakwood Levels – One (1 )
Community Task Force on Facilities SCHOOL DISTRICT MAP
May 20, 2013
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
APPENDIX B – CAPACITY ANALYSIS CAPACITY ANALYSIS: ASSUMPTIONS 1. To determine a building’s capacity it is important to look at the capacity of classrooms within the school. Every school district in the State of Minnesota has goals for class size targets and/or maximums which guide staffing decisions as determined by District policy. A school’s capacity typically respects those class size guidelines to make sure planning for physical space is in sync with the operational goals. 2. Average students per class for Kindergarten: 19* students/class ½ day Kindergarten, 21 students for Extended Day Kindergarten (School Board Goal) 3. Average students per class for elementary (1-5) grades: 24 students per/class was used for the capacity analysis School Board Goals: 1st and 2nd Grade: 22 students/class** 3rd and 4th Grade: 24 students/class** 5th Grade: 26 students/class** 4. Average students per class for secondary grades: MS: 6th, 7th and 8th grades: 27 students/class HS: 9th, 10th, 11th and 12th grades: 28 students/class *Note: State recommendation for Kindergarten is 17 students/adult. **An average (rounded down), for the above, of 24 students/class was used for the capacity analysis.
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
APPENDIX B – CAPACITY ANALYSIS CONTINUED 2012-13 SCHOOL CAPACITY SUMMARY A. Elementary School Capacity Summary 2012-13: Birchview Elementary Gleason Lake Elementary Greenwood Elementary Kimberly Lane Elementary Oakwood Elementary Plymouth Creek Elementary Sunset Hill Elementary Total Elementary School Capacity
649 Student capacity 739 Student capacity 742 Student capacity 762 Student capacity 536 Student capacity 724 + 63 (CMS) Student capacity 601 Student capacity 4,816 Students capacity
B. Middle School Capacity Summary 2012-13: East Middle School West Middle School Central Middle School Total Middle School Capacity
769 Student capacity 790 Student capacity 944 Student capacity 2,503 Student capacity
C. High School Capacity Summary 2012-13: Wayzata High School Total High School Capacity
3,200 Student capacity 3,200 Student capacity
Independent School District #284 Wayzata Public Schools Draft #10 – March 6, 2013 IDENTIFIED ISSUE: ELEMENTARY CAPACITY Student growth in some Elementary attendance boundaries beyond capacity. Quantify Issue: The capacity of all seven elementary schools combined is approximately 4,650 students, the capacity will increase to 4,978 starting fall of 2013/14. Based upon the following assumptions: Each School having: One room reserved for Art, one for Music, (2) Computer Labs, Class sizes per Board policy. (In 2013/14 capacity of 4,978 students assumes (20) Extended Day Kindergarten Rooms and (8) ½ day Kindergarten Rooms (allows for 724 Kindergarten class). Currently 34 students over capacity – All Elementaries combined. 1. 2012/13 Enrollment Pressure a. Plymouth Creek – Approximately 63 Kindergarteners are located at CMS (3 Rooms) Future Trends Future Elementary enrollment trends are significantly affected by the District’s open enrollment policy and resident birthrates. Current Districtwide K-5 projections indicate: 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21
4,761-4,778 Students = 4,831-4,877 Students = 4,809-4,873 Students = 4,785-4,878 Students = 4,850-4,991 Students = 4,819-5,028 Students = 4,819-5,152 Students = 4,819-5,267 Students =
217-200 Students under capacity 147-101 Students under capacity 169-105 Students under capacity 193-100 Students under capacity 128 under to 13 Students over capacity 159 under to 50 Students over capacity 159 under to 174 Students over capacity 159 under to 289 Students over capacity
Five Years
Overall, a 200-300 student enrollment increase total across all attendance areas in the next 5 years; up to 583 student enrollment increase over the next 8 years. The five year projection is under or at capacity. New elementary attendance boundaries in effect for 2013/14 school year. Elementary projected additional capacity need 2019/20 = 150-200 students (assuming no space flexibility). Short Term Solution Options (2012/13) 1. Limit open enrollment 2. Temporary shifting of Kindergarten out of buildings with most pressure. 3. Monitor B-5 census closely. Mid Term Solution Options (2013/14) 1. Comprehensive boundary adjustments to respond 300 +/- students current and future pressure at specific attendance areas. (Plymouth Creek, Birchview, Greenwood). 2. Small additions to provide additional capacity flexibility to help meet annual fluctuations (Sunset Hill, Oakwood, Greenwood). 3. Combination of small additions and boundary changes to better align capacity with enrollment. Long Term Solution Options (if more significant growth continues to be projected) 1. Comprehensive boundary adjustments to restructure areas to allow for projected resident growth and align with future growth potential. 2. Potential grade re-organization to create space for all Elems. (example: K-4/5-8/9-12) 3. Significant elementary classroom additions combined with District-wide boundary changes to create space at all elementaries (K-5). 4. Additional 8th Elementary Building combined with District-wide boundary changes to create space at all elementaries (K-5).
KC/ISD_284/102131/rpts/wayzata school report
Page 1
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 Wayzata Public Schools Draft #10 – March 6, 2013
IDENTIFIED ISSUE: KINDERGARTEN CAPACITY Kindergarten resident enrollment in 2009 and 2010 was up. Kindergarten in the fall of 2011 was down a bit from the recent trend. Recent Kindergarten round up for 2012/2013 indicated increased projected resident Kindergarten enrollment (more similar to 2009 and 2010). Interest in extended-day Kindergarten programming continues to be high. Quantify Issue 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Currently: The District has 704 students enrolled in Kindergarten. (XX students are residents and XX are open-enrolled.) This Kindergarten total is 64 residents more than last year and is XX less residents than the average last 5 years 34% or 218 students are in a full day program and 66% or 422 students are in a half day program The District has approximately 100 students who are in a half day but would prefer a full day program The District has approximately 25-40 students each year that go to another institution for all day Kindergarten but return to Wayzata Schools for 1st grade. Other school districts see all day Kindergarten demand closer to 50-60% when programs are not restricted by space, but it is unclear what Wayzata’s demand would be if additional space was available.
Total current un-met extended-day Kindergarten need: 100-140 students - TBD Total Kindergarten capacity short fall is potentially 4-6 rooms Future Trends Resident Kindergarten projections indicate: 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 1.
2.
650-666 604-650 631-650 650-683 650-661 650-665
students students students students students students
Future trends based upon resident Kindergarten enrollment projections indicate continuation of today’s quantities, possibly another 20-40 students in the next 5 years resulting in no more than one extended day Kindergarten room and one ½ day Kindergarten additional rooms (assuming 34% extended day). Future trends suggest an increasing demand for extended day Kindergarten. The District needs to decide if you want to meet the increasing demand.
Short Term Solution Options (2012/13) 1. Limit open enrollment to adjust for slight resident enrollment projected increase. 2. Temporarily shift Kindergarten students to locations where space exists for one year and return to their buildings in 1st grade. Mid-Term Solution Options (2013/14) 1. Adjust boundaries to respond to current and future student enrollment pressure at specific buildings. Long Term Solution Options (Timeline TBD) See Elementary Long Term Elementary Solution (previous page)
KC/ISD_284/102131/rpts/wayzata school report
Page 2
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 Wayzata Public Schools Draft #10 – March 6, 2013
IDENTIFIED ISSUE: MIDDLE SCHOOL CAPACITY Middle School enrollment varies at the 3 attendance areas Currently the enrollment is unbalanced: There is pressure at Central and East, and available space at West. Quantify Issue 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
The 2011/2012 capacity of all three middle schools combined is 2,491 students (Central 932, East 769, West 790). The 2012/13 capacity of all three middle schools combined is 2,553 (Central 994, East 769, West 790) Currently the Middle School level District-wide is over capacity by 46 students. West is under capacity by 50 students, East is over capacity by 49 students, Central is over capacity by 43 students. Changes at CMS are increasing its capacity for 2013/14 to 1,166 students (2,725 all 3 MS combined). Future planned changes at CMS will increase it further to 1,339 student capacity (2,898 all 3 MS combined).
Future Trends Future middle level enrollment projections indicate: 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21
2,600-2,622 Students = 2,579-2,619 Students = 2,643-2,734 Students = 2,758-2,879 Students = 2,778-2,918 Students = 2,788-2,928 Students = 2,769-2,900 Students = 2,846-2,999 Students =
125-103 146-106 255-164 140-19 120 under to 20 110 under to 30 129 under to 2 52 under to 101
Students under capacity Students under capacity Students under capacity Students under capacity Students over capacity Students over capacity Students over capacity Students over capacity
(Capacity 2,725) (Capacity 2,725) (Capacity 2,898) (Capacity 2,898) (Capacity 2,898) (Capacity 2,898) (Capacity 2,898) (Capacity 2,898)
Five Years
Middle School capacity pressure will likely occur around the 2015/16 school year or beyond. Short Term Solution Options (2012/13) 1. Limit and/or close open enrollment at Elementary and Middle level to reduce pressure on middle level facilities. 2. Strategic placement of 5th grade open enrolled students when they enter middle school, to the middle school where space exists. 3. Explore Administrative Boundary Assignment: placement of 100% of Greenwood attendance area to West Middle School instead of the current boundary which assigns a percentage going to Central. 4. Utilization of teaching stations may need to increase beyond 75% (adds 170 students capacity at 80%). 5. Continue to increase capacity at CMS by re-purposing space Mid-Term Solution Options (2014/15) 1. Boundary adjustments to respond to the student pressure at Central and East Middle School. 2. Explore intra-district transfers to incentivize student placement where space exists. Long Term Solution Options (Timeline TBD) 1. Create additional capacity at Central M.S. by reclaiming additional space for Middle School operations from other district uses by relocation of those programs elsewhere (lease or build). 2. Create additional capacity at East and / or Central by relocating the ALC elsewhere. KC/ISD_284/102131/rpts/wayzata school report
Page 3
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 Wayzata Public Schools Draft #10 – March 6, 2013 IDENTIFIED ISSUE: HIGH SCHOOL CAPACITY High School enrollment pressure results in crowded core facility conditions and potential capacity issues. Quantify Issues 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
The current High School capacity is approximately 3,200 students. On October 1, 2012 the High School was 15 students over that capacity Crowded conditions exist at the cafeteria, hallway circulation points, and during auditorium usage. Attrition throughout the year means roughly 50-75 students less by year-end. Current planning is to increase High School capacity by 500 students for Fall 2015/16 (3,700 capacity)
Future Trends Future High School enrollment projections indicate: 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21
3,252-3,272 Students = 3,360-3,407 Students = 3,455-3,517 Students = 3,521-3,600 Students = 3,522-3,631 Students = 3,612-3,771 Students = 3,688-3,895 Students = 3,707-4,100 Students =
52-72 160-207 245-183 179-100 178-69 88 under to 71 12 under to 195 7 under to 400
Students over capacity Students over capacity Students under capacity Students under capacity Students under capacity Students over capacity Students over capacity Students over capacity
(Capacity 3,200) (Capacity 3,200) (Capacity 3,700) (Capacity 3,700) (Capacity 3,700) (Capacity 3,700) (Capacity 3,700) (Capacity 3,700)
Five Years
Future projected need is additional capacity for 300-500 students as soon as 2015/16 and potentially additional growth beyond 5 years. Short Term Solution Options (2012/13) 1. Limit open enrollment at the high school level and middle level to ultimately reduce pressure on High School facility. Mid-Term Solution Options (2013/14) 1. Explore / Pilot off-site / off campus programming to relieve pressure on current High School facility Examples: Flexible scheduling (class schedule of 1-4 or 2-5) On-line learning schedule School to work / Industry partnerships Post-secondary collaborations Others Long Term Solution Options (2015/16) 1. Address cafeteria capacity and circulation issues with a building addition to bring inadequate High School core facilities in line with existing classroom capacity. (Bond Election 2013?) 2. Address future capacity issue with a building addition to provide additional classroom space and other potential core issues such as physical education space, and/or‌(Bond Election 2013?) Future Solution Options (2019/20) 1. Implement off-site / off campus programming to relieve pressure on current High School facility Examples: Senior Campus (1/2 day), Alternative High School (offsite), 9th grade center Magnet High School (offsite), Flexible scheduling (class schedule of 1-4 or 2-5) Significant on-line learning schedule, School to work / Industry partnerships Post-secondary collaborations Others
KC/ISD_284/102131/rpts/wayzata school report
Page 4
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
APPENDIX C – ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS
May 20, 2013
Community Task Force on Facilities
APPENDIX D – DISTRICT ORGANIZATION OPTIONS
May 20, 2013
Community Task Force on Facilities APPENDIX E – BENEFITS / CHALLENGES
May 20, 2013
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013 Revised: May 10, 2013 HIGH SCHOOL ADDITION (Benefits of one large High School) Academic Achievement Wayzata’s track record of academic achievement ranks high when compared to Minnesota’s other High Schools. U.S. News and World Report National High School 2013 Ranking lists Wayzata High School as #5 in Minnesota, and one of only 6 “gold medal” Schools in the State. Wayzata Public Schools is one of 367 Districts in the nation, and one of 11 Districts in Minnesota, honored by the College Board with a place on the second annual AP Honor Roll (Advanced Placement Coursework). Wayzata Schools traditionally out performs neighboring school districts (as well as the rest of Minnesota) in Composite ACT Scores and National Merit Semifinalists (both with totals and percentage of student body). Wayzata National Merit Semifinalists (2010/11 = 35, 2011/12 = 26, 2012/13 = 22) consistently highest percentage in MN. Wayzata ACT: Composite Score – 26.0 (86% participation rate). Quantity and Quality of Course Offerings Wayzata High School offers more individualized and unique course offerings for our students than any other High School in Minnesota. Examples include: - Yearlong math for 9th graders needing help. - “Read 180” courses for reading focus. - Special electives in culinary arts and industrial technology (not offered in other Districts). - 26 AP course offerings (the most in Minnesota) – 258 courses offered. - Special needs students access a wide choice of general education offerings. Efficient Operating Costs Economies of Scale offer savings in areas of operations including Administration, Food Services, Health Services, Special Services, and Maintenance Services. Areas of economy allow for increased expenditures in areas that other High Schools cannot afford such as Wayzata’s “Block Schedule” and numerous co-curricular advisors, course offerings. Excellence A large student body offers a large competitive pool. This allows each student to find their area of interest and success. The competition in the larger scale environment promotes excellence. Whether in debate, sports or other activities, a large student body encourages one another to find their highest potential. Exposure to a Broad Palette of Activities The large student body equates to a large menu of interests. These develop into the more than 54 different activities available at Wayzata High School. Each student is able to find their “niche”. Examples include: - Art Club, Amnesty International, Business Professionals of America, First Robotics, Trap & Skeet Club, Mock Trial, International Club, Creative Writing Club, DECA, Junior Statesmen of America, Future Problem Sovling, Super Mileage, Skills USA, Debate, Drama, Spanish, Science Bowl, Science Olympiad, Musicals, One Act Play, Spirit Band, Drumline, (4) World Languages, Dance Team, Chess Team, Political Issues, RARE, Pottery, News Break, Math Team, etc. 1,988 WHS students are in one or more of the 54 activities each school year. Athletic Participation WHS has 1,735 students who participate in athletics this represents 53% of the student body. The High School currently offers 36 varsity sports programs throughout the year (maximum allowed by MSHL). Vibrant intramurals. One Unified Community One High School, one mascot, everyone’s a “Trojan”, one Booster Club, one school to dream about. KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/why a large HS
Page 1
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013 Revised: May 10, 2013 HIGH SCHOOL ADDITION (Potential challenges of one large High School) Academic Achievement Some studies indicate small schools are better (small < 800 students).
Large School Environment Could be initially perceived as less personal, unfocused culture, “lose kids”. Maybe overwhelming for freshman and newer families (currently grades organized by floor/”link crew” to help 9th graders). Must make extra effort to develop connections between students and staff. Important to develop personal learning communities to foster connections. Difficult to know the whole student body, or even one’s graduating class.
Athletic Participation Of existing complement of Athletics teams, some sports must cut students due to the limited roster spots (examples include basketball, hockey, baseball, tennis and boys golf, soccer, la crosse, etc.). Many students participate in the community based sports based upon choice or having not gotten selected for a team – i.e. Boy’s Junior Gold Hockey, S.W. Basketball League, Swim and Synchronized Swim Clubs, La Crosse, Baseball, Club Gymnastics, etc. Due to space limitations and funding, Wayzata does not have sophomore “B” teams or 9th grade “B” or “C” teams. If more facilities existed, we could add these teams with a more vibrant intramural program.
Single Campus Location The current geographic location within the District may not be easy or convenient for all students to access depending upon where they reside.
Congestion The concentration of students, vehicles, parents and staff at a single campus may have potential challenges.
Limited Growth Potential The expanded Wayzata High School campus may be challenged to grow further if needed in 20-30 years.
KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/why a large HS
Page 2
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013 Revised: May 10, 2013 A SECOND HIGH SCHOOL (Potential Benefits) Academic Achievement Some studies indicate small schools perform at high levels (small <800 students).
Smaller School Environment New second High School would need to be much smaller than the current High School to match projected enrollment (somewhere between 900 and 1,300 students). A smaller High School could be perceived as more personal, smaller culture, less feeling of “being lost”. Students will more easily know a larger percentage of the whole student body. Students will more easily know their entire graduating class.
New Identity A new school could offer an individual identity to a specific area or history of the District.
Prep for Future Growth The second campus could be set up for additional growth in the future.
Athletic Participation A second High School would likely have its own complement of athletics teams. This would result in additional roster spots for athletes in Wayzata School District (basketball, hockey, baseball, tennis and boy’s golf).
Choice for the Community A second smaller campus could be offered as an option for families concerned about the existing High School size.
KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/why a large HS
Page 3
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013 Revised: May 10, 2013 A SECOND HIGH SCHOOL (Potential Challenges) Academic Achievement There will be different achievement statistics for the two schools. (Not sure how different, just delivering the same results with two different student bodies will be unlikely.) Filling the School / Establishing an Attendance Boundary To ensure that a new second High School would take the pressure off the existing High School, there would likely need to be established an attendance boundary. (This may be controversial for the school community.) Without an attendance boundary, there would need to be significant incentives to drive students to select the new High School. The incentives must be manageable to not over-crowd the new school, create waiting lists and/or community issues. Attendance Boundaries will divide friends. Manage Equity of Opportunities Between Both Schools A challenge between two High Schools in the same community is “equity of opportunity”. This equity comparison is played out in variety of ways (but rarely are things not compared). Example: Course offerings, Athletic Facilities, etc. To avoid “have vs. have-nots” mentality the District would work towards equity. With one High School at 2,800 to 3,200 students and the other High School at 900-1,300 students, the difference in student body size will impact the ability to achieve equity in course offerings and activities. Transporting students between facilities to allow access to course offerings. Transporting staff between facilities to deliver specialized instruction equally. Operating Costs Lost dollars due to reduced “economy of scale” (compared to one large High School). Necessary transport between schools (staff, students, etc.) Managing Socio-Economic and Minority Balance The attendance boundary decisions and intra-district transfer policy decisions will also affect the socio-economic and minority balance between the two schools. Lack of attention to this ever-changing dynamic can create long term issues between the two schools. Managing Enrollment Transfer Between Schools It will be natural that students/families will want to transfer between the two High Schools. Policies will need to be established to manage this activity as it can effect capacity, rivalry, socio-economic, minority, balance, etc. Athletics / Activities Participation Community concerns around “dividing up the talent” across two High Schools. No longer as competitive in the conference? Disparity between “great coaches” and successful programs in the same district. Parents wanting their student to go to “School A” because they believe they “will have a better chance of getting a scholarship.” Potential splitting of youth sports organizations because students are going to two different High Schools, can be emotional. Promoting Healthy Rivalries Between Schools Rivalries naturally emerge between schools. In-District rivalries between High Schools always exist (but not always in a healthy way). Split Community Two High Schools, two mascots, “them vs. us”…? KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/why a large HS
Page 4
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities APPENDIX F – CMS CONCEPTUAL CAPACITY INCREASE DIAGRAM
May 20, 2013
ISD # 284 - WAYZATA PUBLIC SCHOOLS CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL SUMMER 2013 REMODEL
Gym Deck
J
S S
T
Future Pol. Liason Stor
S
T Health
Stor
A204
S
S
S
J
ALT. FACILITIES FOR FACE LIFT @ PRACTICE ROOMS & OFFICES
Math 7
School T Store
T Spec Ed Off
Stor Lang Arts Coord
PHASE I (SUMMER 2013) REMODEL TO BE ANOTHER CMS MUSIC REHEARSAL/MULTIPURPOSE SPACE
Off
PHASE I (SUMMER 2013) CMS CLASSROOM
Computer A410
Lang Arts 7
Science 7
PHASE II (SUMMER 2016) CONVERT TO CMS CLASSROOM
Wrestling/ P.E.
DRAFT: March 20, 2013
J
Stor T
A203
Kitchen
Band
E115
E106
A202
Kiln
Setting III E117
Art
PHASE I (SUMMER 2013) REMODEL TO BE AN ENCORE MULTIPURPOSE ROOM
E118
PHASE II (SUMMER 2016) CONVERT TO SPECIAL ED SPACE
Tech Stor Work
Community Ed Use
Stor
SPECIAL ED
Off
Room PHASE II (SUMMER 2016)
Stor.
DIST. STAFF. DEVELOP. A114
Courtyard
S.E. S.E.
Office
A201
Room T
Teach/ Teach/ Learn Learn
Welcome Center
Office
T
Work
Music
E102
E114
E116
OFFICE
Dist Tech Offices
Elem Science Center
T
Room
T Auditorium Stage
RoomTRoom
Room
Cust Room
Main Entry
2012-2013 Capacity Classrooms
PHASE II (SUMMER 2016) TECH EXPANSION
46 x 27 students
Room =1,242 students
Utilization Factor x .80 = 994 student capacity (actual 2012/2013 = 1,037 capacity)
2013-2014 Capacity +
classrooms 54 x 27 students Utilization Factor x .80
= 1,458 students = 1,166 student capacity
2017-2018 Capacity +
Central Middle School Main Level-South Capacity
3/20/2013 11:08:24 AM C:\_Revit_Project_Files\Wayzata_Facilities(Central)_kschalow.rvt \\Minnesota\StPaul\ISD284\Facilities\102214\Revit\Wayzata_Facilities(Central).rvt
Room
Room
Foyer
Community Education
Room
Room
PHASE I (SUMMER 2013) MOVE TECH RECEIVING TO C.S.F.
1" = 40'-0"
Room Room
Room
Room
Room
1
Stor
T T Band
OFFICE Room
Alt Comp
BOB B. OFFICE
Room Stor Room
Choir
Off
Off Off
Stor
Soc Stud 7
PHASE II (SUMMER 2016)
PHASE II (SUMMER 2016) MOVE CURRICULUM + INST./ASSESSMENT
Equip
District Staff Develop. A111
ASSESS
Tech Stor Tech Stor
Tech
Off
Office
Tech.
Tech Suite
Cooler Freezer
Work
Office
+
classrooms 62 x 27 students Utilization Factor x .80
= 1,647 students = 1,339 student capacity
Room
Room
ISD # 284 - WAYZATA PUBLIC SCHOOLS CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL SUMMER 2013 REMODEL DRAFT: March 20, 2013
Off
Media Center
PHASE II (SUMMER 2016)
AV Studio Ctrl CLASSROOM
MEDIA
Elec
ECFE/PRE K
Training
PHASE II CLASSROOM
ECFE/PRE K
Reading 6/8
Computer
PHASE I (SUMMER 2013) CONVERT TO CMS CLASSROOMS
6
T
Foods
ETD
A306
A303
Off.
T 6
6
C110
C113
Spec Ed 6
6
6
C107
C105
C102
ECFE/PRE K
6
6
C101
C114
A.P.
Dean
Work
Conf
Spec Ed Offices
Elev 6
6
C106
C104
C103
Soc Wrk Work Rm Couns T T
Stor A302
Lang Arts 7 A207
Office Police
Kit
PRE K
PHASE I (SUMMER 2013) RECLAIM CMS CLASSROOM
Biology 7
Principal
6
PRE K
K
Stor
Recept
Staff Lounge
Central Middle School Main Level-North Capacity 1" = 40'-0"
ECFE/PRE K STAFF DIR
6
C108
3/20/2013 11:08:24 AM C:\_Revit_Project_Files\Wayzata_Facilities(Central)_kschalow.rvt \\Minnesota\StPaul\ISD284\Facilities\102214\Revit\Wayzata_Facilities(Central).rvt
K
MOTOR ROOM
C111 C115
1
K
T LUNCHSTAFF ECSE WORK/ T BREAK T T STOR SP SOC
T
Computer
C122
C109
ECSE
BABY
Kit
FLC WORK RM
FLC STOR/ SPEECHSOC LAUNDRY STOR ECFE/PRE K
6
ECFE SCREENING
T PHASE I (SUMMER 2013) CONVERT TO CLASSROOM
EXPAND READING
C123
ECFE/PRE K
D
Off Conf
PARENT ED OFFICE PARENT ED OFFICE
Off Network
W
Off Off
"FUTURE EXPANSION"
ECFE/PRE K
Courtyard Greenhouse
PHASE II (SUMMER 2016) CAFETERIA EXPANSION
SPANISH/SOC/ ADVISORY
Math 7 Soc Stud 7 A205
A206
FALL 2013 SPECIAL ED. (NO WORK)
PRE K
ECFE/PRE K
ISD # 284 - WAYZATA PUBLIC SCHOOLS CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL SUMMER 2013 REMODEL
PHASE I (SUMMER 2013) CONVERT TO CLASSROOM
DRAFT: March 20, 2013
SPRINKLER HEAD END
Lang Arts 8
Soc Stud 8 C017
C018
Stor CLASSROOM
Wood Lab
C019
B005
Science 8 C025
Math 8 C016
Small Gym B091
Lang Arts 8 C013
Lang Arts 8
Health 8
Science 8
Science 7/8
C014
C023
C015
Soc Stud 8
Spanish
C011
C001
MOVE BOOKS TO STORAGE
C012
Math 8
8TH GRADE CLASSROOM
Large Gym GYM
SUMMER 2013 MOVE ALC HERE, NO WORK
Computer Spanish
C010
C009
C002
ALC C003
Spec Ed
Computer
C008
C005
PHASE I (SUMMER 2013) RENOVATE FOR SPECIAL ED SETTING III
Move 8th Grade Dean's Office here?
Soc Stud 7 C007
Math 7 C006
Lang Arts 7 C004
Ice Arena
2
Lower Level-B Wing Capacity 1" = 40'-0"
GOAL: 8TH GRADE ONLY @ LOWER LEVEL
1
Central Middle School Lower Level-C Wing Capacity 1" = 40'-0"
3/20/2013 11:08:24 AM C:\_Revit_Project_Files\Wayzata_Facilities(Central)_kschalow.rvt \\Minnesota\StPaul\ISD284\Facilities\102214\Revit\Wayzata_Facilities(Central).rvt
Community Task Force on Facilities APPENDIX G – DISTRICTWIDE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS
May 20, 2013
February 28, 2013 Technology Levy Renewal Recommendation DRAFT Learning technologies and services are supported by the Wayzata community through two voter approved technology focused levies. The resources generated by these levies directly impact student learning and provide for services, systems, and support to those who are responsible for the delivery of an exceptional education to each and every Wayzata student. The Wayzata Public School Technology Levy would maintain and enhance classroom technology to support student learning in alignment with the district's strategic roadmap. It would replace the current levy that expires in 2016 and would provide approximately $2.0 million a year over the next ten years. The Technology Levy would: ● Deliver exceptional student learning experiences through MyWay and the student 1:1 mobile learning initiative. ● Update and maintain student and staff computer equipment to provide for a contentrich personalized education. ● Provide high quality professional development to incorporate effective teaching and learning strategies into classroom instruction through the use of technology ● Install and maintain classroom technology including digital whiteboards, audio video systems and auditory accommodations. ● Update and maintain existing educational and information systems along with wired and wireless networks. ● Provide worldclass support and service to students, parents and staff. ● Ensure operational excellence in the delivery of teaching and learning through technologybased content, experiences and connections.
Teaching and Learning
Levy 1 2009 2020 $3.5 Million
Levy 2 2005 2016 $2.0 Million
Total Budget $5.5 Million*
$100,000
$2,000,000
38 %
Support and Information Systems
$1,300,000
24 %
Operations and Infrastructure
$1,900,000
35 %
$280,000
4 %
Administrative Support
February 28, 2013 Bond Referendum Recommendation DRAFT Learning technologies and services are supported by the Wayzata community through two, voter approved, technology focused levies providing approximately $5.5 million a year. The resources generated by these levies directly impact student learning and provide for services, systems, and support to those who are responsible for the delivery of an exceptional education to each and every Wayzata student. While these levy resources provide for the ongoing yearly maintenance and enhancement of classroom technology in support of student learning, capital referendum resources are essential to position the Wayzata Public Schools for future operational, infrastructure and educational needs. The capital referendum resources would provide: Enhance Learning Environments Audio / Visual: Districtwide Classroom Retrofits for Technology ●
Installation and upgrade of classroom learning technologies including: digital whiteboards, audio video systems, projection systems and auditory accommodations. ● Continued delivery of exceptional student learning experiences through MyWay and the student 1:1 mobile learning initiative. Background Wayzata Schools currently has approximately 500 core technology enhanced classroom learning spaces that are outfitted with essential digital tools. Digital whiteboards, audio video, projections systems and auditory accommodations are standard in each learning space and are used extensively by educators and learners in the process of teaching and learning. These essential learning assets have a useful life between 7 10. Desired Outcome There is a significant educational need to provide a proactive replacement plan for these classroom learning tools to help ensure high levels of educational outcomes. Classroom technology would also be put into place to assist with management, charging, and security of mobile learning devices in the classroom, as well as, the use of collaborative workspace or to display artifacts of student learning. In essence, provide opportunities to assist in the process of make learning visible through the use of digital and video technology. Investment Estimate Digital Whiteboards
Digital Video Projection
Audio Systems and Accommodations
Total / Room
Total District
$1900
$1000
$1100
$4000
$2,000,000
Technology Infrastructure and Fiber Optic Redundancy ● Ensure operational excellence in the delivery of teaching and learning through an updated and redundant highspeed fiber optic network. ● Update existing educational and information infrastructure along with wired and wireless systems. Background Wayzata Schools currently owns 17.2 miles of underground fiber optic cable installed in the mid 90’s, providing a high speed network link between all school sites. The current fiber network was installed in a radial spoke fashion in which all fibers originate at Central Middle School and terminate at each location with no redundancy in the event of a severed line. Outside fiber infrastructure has a commonly accepted estimated useful life of approximately 20 years, placing our current system at about the 17 year mark with a pressing need for upgrades, redundancies, and enhancements to the system in the nearterm. Core networking and switch equipment has an estimated useful life of approximately 10 years. Desired Outcome There is a significant operational need to provide redundant paths between all district sites in the event of a fiber cut. All educational and administrative services are carried to each school site by fiber optic cable including telecommunications and Internet services. Depending on the location of the cut, services would be interrupted to as many as 6 of our sites at once. Redundancy would provide an automatic realtime alternative path to provide integrity of service to meet the growing needs of our learners and stakeholders. Why Now? ○ Reliable and redundant systems are essential to the learning and operational functions of the District ○ Expectation of 24/7/365 services ○ District launched Ipad MyWay 1:1 ○ Aging of current fiber infrastructure ○ Lower projected construction costs ○ Expansion and additional students Investment Estimate District Fiber Upgrade
Core Network Infrastructure
Edge Network / Infrastructure
Wireless Infrastructure
Total
$2,200,000
$200,000
$500,000
$500,000
$3,400,000
Independent School District #284 - Wayzata Community Taskforce on Facilities April 17, 2013 ENERGY SAVINGS UPGRADE OPPORTUNITIES (Leverage Alternative Facilities Funding) What is Alternative Facilities Funding? Wayzata Schools recently qualified for this program which authorizes local levy authority to maintain existing facilities. This program’s funding source has some restrictions when it comes to increasing energy efficiency. Key Concepts Regarding Energy Savings Upgrades Alternative Facilities Funding provides the District with funds for “Like for Like” replacement for broken and/or deteriorated (end of life) item replacement. Cannot replace items solely to gain energy efficiency. Cannot always add new items/components which enhance efficiency. MDE will allow some energy improvements as modern components are inherently more efficient. MDE will require capital funds to be part of the funding stream when certain energy projects are proposed. What is proposed? Additional capital funds to be available to be strategically combined with Alternative Facilities Funding to implement an existing facility upgrade project that better leverages energy savings opportunities. An allowance of $6.0 to $8.4 million to be used in combination with the District’s 10 year maintenance plan. Example Enhancements Variable Frequency Drives (attachment to increase efficiency of electric motors that run pumps and fans) Energy Recovery Units (desiccant wheels added to Air Handling Equipment to capture and return energy) Occupancy Sensors on air handling (CO2 analysis), on lighting (motion) L.E.D. lighting Daylight Control: Photo cell Off Peak: Ice Storage Solar: Photo Voltaic Panels Scale of Opportunity Variable Frequency Drives 230 motors (w/o VFDs) x $3,500 = $805,000 Energy Recovery Units 92 Air Handling Units (1,050,000 CFM) x $2-$4/CFM = $2,850,000 122 Roof Top Units (380 tons) x $1,000-$2,000/ton = $462,500 Occupancy Sensors on Lighting 1,600,000 SF x 80% x $1.25 = $1,600,000 LED Lighting 1,600,000 x 25% x $2.42/SF = $968,000 Pay Back Concepts Variable Frequency Drives Energy Recovery Units Occupancy Sensors on Air Handling Occupancy Sensors on Lighting LED Lighting
4 to 6 years 15 to 25 years 2 to 4 years 3 to 5 years 10 to 12 years
Why now? The District is just starting your 10 year Alternative Facilities Funding with numerous pending projects which could benefit. Annual Capital Funds are always stretched and are not available for these projects. Capital Funding will go further / more value when combined with other Alternative Facilities maintenance projects. KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/Energy Savings
Page 1
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
APPENDIX H – COSTS ANALYSIS
May 20, 2013
Independent School District #284 - Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: March 27, 2013 PHASE III: SECONDARY CAPACITY / EDUCATIONAL ADEQUACY (BOND REFERENDUM FALL 2013) BUDGET SCOPE WORKSHEET A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
High School Capacity Needs: 1. Core Size: Cafeteria / Auditorium lobby / Commons 2. Additional Classroom Capacity 500 additional students (total cap. 3,700) Classrooms (8 classrooms / 8 labs) Support Spaces 3. Music Capacity 4. P.E. / Co-Curricular Capacity (2) Multi-purpose spaces / (2) Locker Rooms Gymnasium (2 Stations) 5. Additional 400 Student Capacity (total cap 4100) Site Capacity / Improvement Needs: 1. Capacity: Additional Land Adjacent to High School Campus (Portion of Former Elm Creek Golf Course – 36 Acres) 2. Capacity/Safety: Another Site Entrance to High School / Roadways 3. Capacity: Expanded Parking / Relocation of Tennis, etc. (366 Additional Stalls) 4. Capacity: Development of New Fields / Replace Lost Fields 5. Capacity: Additional 200 Stalls Middle School Capacity Needs: 1. Capacity (Reallocate/remodel CMS space) 2. Move adults out of CMS (to WHS Additional: Temporary) 3. Then move adults out of WHS (New Admin space elsewhere) 4. Locker Room Upgrades at Central Middle School 5. Parking/Entrance: MS/Family Learning Center Districtwide Infrastructure Needs: 1. Improved Greeter/Secure Entrances Elementary Schools (match Oakwood/Gleason Lake Model) Security Systems Upgrade Middle Schools (match Elementaries) 2. Energy Savings Upgrade Opportunities (Leverage Alt. Facilities) 3. Technology Infrastructure and Fiber Optic Redundancy Preparedness Needs: 21st Century Learning (where do we want to be in 10-20 years) 1. Districtwide Media Center Retrofits Elementary Schools (match Oakwood Model) Middle Schools High School 2. Enhance Instruction: Districtwide Classroom Retrofits Classroom Furniture Classroom Technology Facility Upgrades for Excellence 1. High School Music / Performance Expansion / Small Theatre 2. Extended Use Synthetic Grass (2 fields at High School) 3. Light existing Fields (2 practice fields?) 4. High School Stadium Bathrooms 5. High School Gymnastics Needs/Additional M.S. Gym Station SUBTOTAL Elementary Capacity Needs: 1. Future Elementary Land (Assume purchase 23 Acres useable) 2. Additional Elementary Capacity More Additions New Elementary (not including land) SUBTOTAL GRAND TOTAL Technology Needs: 1. Technology Levy ($2.6 mil + $1.9 mil increase)
KL/ISD_284/102131/rpts/ Phase III: Secondary Capacity / Educational Adequacy pg40
2012-2013 Scope Considerations
Spring 2013 Recommended Scope
$8.2 mil $15.7 mil $2.395 mil $7.475 mil $8.300 mil Incl. $10.3 mil $7.4 mil $1.75-$2.5 mil $2.4 mil $750k-$1.0 mil $550K $2 - $3 mil $6 - $7 mil $1.75 - $2 mil $300k- $500k $300K $1.25 mil $2.875 mil $6.0 -$8.4 mil $3.4 mil $2.4 - $3.0 mil $2.8 - $3.5 mil $1.4 -$2.4 mil $5.2 - $6.5 mil $2.0 mil $8.665 mil $2.0 mil $250k $475k $2.295 mil $116.58 mil - $126.03 mil $4.2 mil $3.5 - $4.2 mil $17.5 – $21.4 mil $25.2 mil – $29.8 mil $141.78 mil - $155.83 mil $4.5 mil (annual levy not in totals above)
Page 40
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013 COST ANALYSIS: FIRST COST (CONSTRUCTION) Budget Concepts: New High School is 36,000 SF larger than the High School addition for this comparison. Per MDE Guidelines a 900 student HS average is 205 SF/St. 1300 student HS average is 190 SF/ST (not including theatres). New building construction cost bid 2014 - $195/SF (assumption). Addition square footage cost is often a bit more expensive than new building (current assumption 22% more at $237.9/ SF ave) New buildings project costs are often higher than additions due to city development/infrastructure costs and fees (multiplier 1.3 vs. 1.25). Option A: High School Addition 900 Students x 165 SF/Student = 148,500 SF Building Construction
148,500 SF x $ 238/SF $ 35.343 mil x 1.25 $ 44.178 mil
(Bid 2014) Construction Cost Project Cost
Site development of 37 additional acres plus redevelopment of 17-22 existing acres (site changes: roads, fields) $ 6.45 mil $ 7.4 mil Additional site purchase: 37 acres Total project cost: $ 58.028 mil Option B1: A Second High School (900 Students) 900 Students x 205 SF/Student = 184,500 SF Building Construction
184,500 SF x $ 195 $ 35.977 mil x 1.3 $ 46.770 mil
(Bid 2014) Construction Cost Project Cost
Incl. New site development of 44-49 acres $ 10.0 mil New site purchase 44-49 acres (useable) Total project cost $ 56.77 mil Option B2: A Second High School (1,300 Students) 1,300 Student x 190 SF/Student = 247,000 SF $ 62.615 mil 247,000 Sqft. x $195 x 1.3 Incl. New site development 47-59 acres $ 10.7 mil New site purchase 47-52 acres (useable) Total project cost $ 73.315 mil Summary: Housing 900 students whether in an addition to your High School or a second High School, will be very similar in first cost. The actual proposed High School addition differs from “Option A” above as it includes some additional needs beyond only student capacity. (Examples: Community Gym Space, 2nd Auditorium, Gymnastics Gym etc.) total potential square footage = 192,226 SF, project cost with land $66.17 mil. KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/cost_analysis
Page 1
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013
COST ANALYSIS ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS (UTILITIES, ETC.) Option A (148,500 SF) Addition to High School Natural Gas Electricity Water/Sewer Garbage Internet Telephone Copiers Insurance
Annual Cost $36,591 $118,617 $15,856 $0 Same $0 $3,660 $14,000
Option B (184,500 SF) Second High School Natural Gas Electricity Water/Sewer Garbage Internet Telephone Copiers Insurance
TOTALS $188,724
Annual Cost $45,461 $147,472 $19,700 $4,500 Same $294 $6,000 $17,500 $240,827
Cost Difference $8,870 $28,755 $3,844 $4,500 $294 $2,340 $3,500 $52,103
Summary: Opening a Second High School has some additional utility costs compared to a high school addition.
KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/cost_analysis
Page 2
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013
COST ANALYSIS ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS (STAFFING COSTS) Option A Addition to High School Associate Principal Assoc. Prin. Secretary N/A N/A Additional .5 Para Food Svs. Employee Custodian N/A N/A Additional Salary N/A Activities Coordinator N/A N/A Additional Staff N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cost $128,880 $40,409 $0 $0 $16,078 $18,452 $47,779 $0 $0
Option B Second High School Principal Head Secretary Office Para Front Door Greeter Health Para Food Svs. Manager Head Custodian Grounds (.5) Maintenance
Cost $151,441 $55,057 $26,451 $30,229 $32,155 $31,549 $54,496 $25,147 $50,294
Cost Difference $22,561 $14,648 $26,451 $30,229 $16,078 $13,097 $6,717 $25,147 $50,294
$2,000 $0 $98,709 $0 $30,970 $5,928 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Department Chairs Auditorium Coord. Activities Director Media Specialist Vision 21 - .5 Lunchroom Supervision Instrumental Director Vocal Director Orchestra Director Equipment Manager Website Editor
$14,000 $4,355 $113,533 $61,941 $30,970 $8,563 $6,700 $6,700 $4,700 $5,000 $3,000
$12,000 $4,355 $14,824 $61,941 $0 $2,635 $6,700 $6,700 $4,700 $5,000 $3,000
Athletics and Activities
$358,962 $1,075,243
$226,653 $553,729.50 Additional Annual Cost for Second High School
Athletics and Activities $132,309 TOTALS $521,514
Notes: No benefits were included in the costing this would typically run another 15-25%. Summary: Opening a Second High School has some additional salary costs compared to a high school addition. Teaching staff would be indirect proportion to students and therefore no difference in costs.
KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/cost_analysis
Page 3
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013
COST ANALYSIS ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS (ACTIVITIES COSTS) Option A Addition to High School Additional Teams Non-Staff Costs
Additional Co-curricular Non-Staff Costs
Cost
Option B Second High School
Cost
Cost Difference
$TBD
All Teams Non-Staff Costs
$TBD
Assumed Negligible
$TBD
Additional Co-curricular Non-Staff Costs
$TBD
Assumed Negligible
KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/cost_analysis
Page 4
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013
COST ANALYSIS ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS (TRANSPORTATION, ETC.) Option A Addition to High School - Additional Transportation 900 Students
Cost
Option B Second High School
Cost
Same
- Additional Transportation 900 Students
Same
- Shuttle between campuses
$10,000
$10,000
TOTALS $10,000
$10,000
TOTALS $0
KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/cost_analysis
Page 5
Cost Difference
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013
COST ANALYSIS: SUMMARY
First Cost Summary: Building Land Site Development Furnishings Equipment Project Costs Totals
Option A High School Addition
Option B 900 Student High School
Cost Difference
$35.343 mil $7.4 mil $6.45 mil Included * Included * $8.835 mil $58.028 mil
$35.977 mil $10.0 mil Included Included * Included * $10.793 mil $56.77mil
$1,258,000
* Note: Both project cost multipliers include start-up cost for furnishings and equipment. This allowance is 10% of the building construction cost.
Option A High School Addition
Option B 900 Student High School
Cost Difference
Operating Cost (utilities)
$188,724
$240,827
$52,103
Staffing Cost
$521,514
$1,075,243
$553,729
Activities Cost
TBD
TBD
TBD
Transportation Cost
$0
$10,000
$10,000
Food Service Costs
Included above
Included above
Included above
Maintenance Costs
Included above
Included above
Included above
$1,326,070
$615,832
Annual Costs Summary:
Indentified Annual Cost Totals $710,238 Summary:
First Cost: The addition is likely somewhat more expensive. Estimate $1.258 mil. Annual Operating Costs: The 2nd High School is more expensive. Estimate $615,832 Annually Over 20 years: The additional operating costs could exceed $12 million (in today’s $). Operating Costs are often an important differentiator when looking long term.
KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/cost_analysis
Page 6
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013 COST ANALYSIS START UP COSTS (ACTIVITIES COSTS) Option A Addition to High School
Option B Second High School Football Track Basketball Tennis Golf Wrestling Volleyball Soccer La Crosse Baseball Softball Band Choir Hockey Swimming Drama SUBTOTALS Media Center Phy Ed Equipment Weight Room Marching Band Science Buildings and Grounds Culinary Computer Lab FACS SUBTOTALS TOTAL Less Allowance in First Cost Construction Unfunded Difference
Cost
KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/cost_analysis
Page 7
Cost $103,830 $50,266 $12,260 $13,020 $3,400 $35,025 $15,675 $41,190 $15,670 $11,700 $4,050 $191,000 $60,500 $33,100 $51,850 $50,000 $692,536 $75,000 $46,000 $125,000 $181,000 $20,000 $150,000 $150,000 $30,000 $5,080 $782,080 $1,474,616 $1,439,000 $35,616
Cost Difference
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities APPENDIX I – CASE STUDIES
May 20, 2013
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013 CASE STUDIES: DECISION TO GO FROM ONE TO TWO ISD #194 – Lakeville Schools (MN) Lakeville North High School opened in Fall 1992 (capacity 1,500 / core 1,800) Community Study Committee on Secondary Facilities in 1995 for needs through 2015 Community Taskforce made recommendation in June 1995 for second High School. Vote likely in Fall 1998. Passed vote in 2002 to build a second High School “South” (both High Schools to be 9-12 capacity 1,800). At the time (2001): - Existing High School was 10-12 (capacity 1,800). - 10-12 enrollment was 1,971 - 10 year projections indicated growth of 9-12 to 3,456 “Today:” - Lakeville North: 371,968 SF / 1,711 students - Lakeville South: 371,842 SF / 1,774 students District 112 Eastern Carver County (Chaska, MN) Community Taskforce made recommendation in 2005? (studied previously?) Voted in 2006 to build a second High School “Chanhassen” (both to be 9-12 capacity 2,000). At the time (2005): - Existing High School was 10-12 (capacity 1,600) (400 student capacity addition in 2008 to get to capacity of 2,000). - 10-12 enrollment was 1,771. - 10 year projections indicated growth of 9-12 to 3,100 students. Chanhassen High School opened 2009. “Today:” - Chaska High School: 410,336 SF / 1,042 students - Chanhassen High School: 410,000 SF / = 1,383 students ISD #728 – Elk River Schools Community Taskforce made recommendation in 1999? Voted in 2000 to building a second High School “Rogers” (both to be 9-12). Rogers High School opened in 2003: Capacity 1000 students/225,000 SF At the time (2000): - Existing Elk River High School was 10-12 (capacity XXXX). - 10-12 enrollment was 1,951 (10-12). - 10 year projections indicated growth of 9-12 to XXXXX. “Today:” - Elk River High School: 327,837 SF / 1,570 students (9-12) - Rogers High School: 221,010 SF / 1,161 students (9-12) - Zimmerman High School / Middle School: 182,385 SF (6-12) / 547 Students (9-12) ISD #720 – Shakopee Schools Community Taskforce in 2003 left option open for “the possibility of two High Schools” when recommending a new “small” High School (capacity 1,600) Voters approved a new High School in 2004, opened in 2007 Community Taskforce in 2010 confirmed recommendation for 2nd High school (both capacity 1,600) predicted vote in 2014. At the time (2010): - Existing Shakopee High School was 10-12 (capacity 1,600) - 10-12 enrollment was 1,389 (10-12) - 10 year projections indicated growth of (9-12) to 2,837 Community Taskforce in 2012 re-confirmed recommendation for 2nd High School Vote potentially in Spring 2014. “Today:” - Shakopee High School: 1,736 students Sources: “Today” Info – MDE website and/or MSHL KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/Case Studies
Page 1
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013 CASE STUDIES: DECISION TO GO FROM ONE TO TWO (continued) ISD 833 - South Washington County Schools Voted in 1973? to build a second High School (Woodbury High School). At the time (1973?): - 10-12 enrollment was 2,173. 1975 Woodbury Senior High opened with 611 students, Park had 1,839 “Today:” - Park High School: 403,981 SF / 1,656 students - Woodbury High School: 366,599 SF / 1,715 students - East Ridge High School: 374,672 SF / 1,543 students ISD #621 – Mounds View Voted in 1965? to build a second High School (both to be 9-12 capacity XXXX). At the time (1965?): - 10-12 enrollment was 2,113. 1968 Irondale High School opened with 673 students. Moundsview had 1,822. “Today:” - Irondale High School: 328,071 SF / 1,355 students - Mounds View High School: 300,514 SF / 1,671 students ISD #622 – North St. Paul Voted in 1967? to build a second High School (Tartan High School). At the time (1967?): - 10-12 enrollment was 2,073. 1970 Tartan High School opened with 1,148 students, North had 1,879. “Today:” - Tartan High School: 259,700 SF / 1,581 students - North High School: 356,900 SF / 1,671 students ISD #77 – Mankato Schools Voted in 1968? to build a second High School (East). At the time (1967): - 10-12 enrollment was approximately 1,620. “Today:” - East High School: 327,000 SF / 784 students - West High School: 284,000 SF / 1,007 students ISD #624 – White Bear Lake Voted in 1969? to build a second High School (Mariner High School opened in 1972 with 893 students). At the time (1969?) - 10-12 enrollment was approximately 2,168 Closed Mariner High School in 1983 (after 11 years) now “North” 1983: - North Campus: 1,262 students - South Campus: 1,345 students “Today:” - North Campus: 280,906 SF / +/- 1,128 students - South Campus: 289,953 SF / +/- 1,128 students KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/Case Studies
Page 2
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013
CASE STUDIES: DISTRICTS WHO HAVE (2) UNEQUAL SIZED HIGH SCHOOLS ISD #196 – Rosemount/Apply Valley/Eagan Apple Valley HS Eagan HS Eastview HS Rosemount HS S.E.S.(School of Environmental Studies)
1,638 students / 360,104 SF 2,147 students / 382,970 SF 2,056 students / 338,242 SF 2,013 students / 401,428 SF 423 students / 71,171 SF (grades 11-12)
ISD #728 – Elk River Schools Elk River High School Rogers High School
1,570 students / 327,837 SF 1,161 students / 221,010 SF
ISD #625 – Saint Paul Public Schools Central High School Harding High School Johnson High School Como Park High School Highland Park High School Humboldt High School Gordon Parks High School Agape High School LEAP High School
1,716 students / 340,641 SF 1,355 students / 264,112 SF 1,123 students / 272,771 SF 1,111 students / 220,444 SF 1,151 students / 223,191 SF 423 students / 230,829 SF 236 students / 33,745 SF 96 students / 24,883 SF 349 students / 89,049 SF
ISD #001 – Minneapolis Schools Edison High School Henry High School North High School Roosevelt High School South High School Southwest High School Washburn High School Wellstone International
558 students / 257,922 SF 747 students / 227,525 SF 171 students / 283,568 SF 563 students / 307,029 SF 1,587 students / 278,843 SF 1,529 students / 264,560 SF 741 students / 231,387 SF 116 students / XXX SF
KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/Case Studies
Page 3
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 – Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: May 1, 2013 CASE STUDIES: DISTRICTS WHO HAVE (2) UNEQUAL SIZED HIGH SCHOOLS (continued) ISD #11 – Anoka-Hennepin Anoka High School Blaine High School Champlin Park High School Coon Rapids High School
2,157 students / 325,883 SF 2,551 students / 326,097 SF 2,571 students / 380,253 SF 2,120 students / 435,595 SF
ISD #271 – Bloomington Jefferson High School Kennedy High School
1,543 students / 377,840 SF 1,275 students / 404,124 SF
ISD #279 – Osseo Osseo Senior High Park Center High School Maple Grove High School
1,873 students / 373,000 SF 1,471 students / 398,774 SF 2,142 students / 335,872 SF
ISD #709 – Duluth Public Schools East High School Denfold High School
1,345 students / 286,509 SF 1,071 students / 333,190 SF
ISD #281 – Robbinsdale Schools Armstrong High School Cooper High School
1,789 students / 373,653 SF 1,468 students / 359,998 SF
ISD #535 – Rochester Schools John Marshall High School Mayo High School Century High School
1,391 students / 363,422 SF 1,506 students / 345,512 SF 1,275 students / 294,954 SF
ISD #742 – Saint Cloud Schools Technical High School Apollo High School
1,241 students / 347,640 SF 1,031 students / 347,503 SF
KL/ISD_284/102131/community taskforce/Case Studies
Page 4
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities APPENDIX J – LARGE HIGH SCHOOLS / BEST HIGH SCHOOLS
May 20, 2013
Independent School District #284 Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities March 20, 2013 TOP 100 LARGEST HIGH SCHOOLS IN AMERICA (EXCERPT ENROLLMENTS OF 3,700 TO 4,200) highschoolguide.org – Top 100 Largest High Schools in America – August 26, 2011.
Rank 56 55 54 53 52 51
Name of School Upland HS Klein Oak HS Brentwood HS J. Sterling Morton East Silverado HS Upper Darby HS
Location Upland, CA Spring, TX Brentwood, NY Cicero, IL Victorville, CA Drexel Hill, PA
Enrollment (Website Info) 3,709 (3,679) 3,721 (4,132) 3,751 (3,532) 3,751 (3,580) 3,753 3,762
Grade Levels 9-12 9-12 9-12 10-12 9-12 9-12
One Building X X No X X X
50
Deer Park HS
Deer Park, TX
3,772
9-12
No
49 48
Noble Street Charter HS Lake Braddock Secondary
3,784 3,789
7-12
No X
47
The Woodlands HS
3,795 (3,942)
9-12
No
9th Grade Center
46
Central HS East Campus
Chicago, IL Burke, VA The Woodlands, TX Fresno, CA
3,795
9-12
No
45
Lyons Township HS
LaGrange, IL
3,812 (3,981)
9-12
No
9th: West Campus 9th- 10th: South Campus 11th -12th: North Campus
44
Roosevelt HS
Los Angeles, CA
3,819
9-12
43
Duncanville HS
Duncanville, TX
3,844 (4,008)
9-12
? X (863,137 SF)
Lockport, IL
3,848
9-12
Fontana, CA Forest Hills, NY Reseda, CA Weston, FL Downey, CA Brockton, MA Long Beach, CA
9-12 ? 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 ?
X ? X X X No ?
7-12
X
9-12
X
41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34
Robinson Secondary
Fairfax, VA
33
Granada Hills Charter HS
Granada Hills, CA
3,849 3,860 3,861 (3,910) 3,980 (4,400) 4,016 (4,200) 4,029 (4,419) 4,056 4,067 (2,696 HS) 4,143 (4,300)
32
James Logan HS
Union City, CA
4,150 (3,704)
9-12
No
31
Elsik HS Huntington Park Senior High John A. Ferguson SHS Lane Technical HS Brooklyn Technical HS
Houston, TX Huntington Park, CA Miami, FL Chicago, IL Brooklyn, NY
4,166
9-12
No
4,185
9-12
X
4,186 (4,241) 4,192 8,076
9-12 7-12 9-12
X X X
30 29 28 1
KL/ISD_284/102131/Community Task Force / US High Schools
9th Grade Center
9th: North Campus 10th -12th : South Campus 12 Campuses
9th: Central Campus 10th -12th: East Campus
Lockport Township HS East Fontana HS Forest Hills HS Grover Cleveland HS Cypress Bay HS Downey HS Brockton HS Jordon HS
42
Multiple Locations
?
9 Building Campus ?
Campus (Multiple Buildings) 9th Grade Center
One 12 story building
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities March 20, 2013 TOP HIGH SCHOOLS IN THE US U.S. News Ranking: Best* High Schools (over 2,700 enrollment)
#58
Styvesant H.S.
NY 3,277 students
#63
Bronx H.S. of Science
NY 2,941 students
#88
James Robinson **
Fairfax, VA 4,067 students
#131
Coral Reef
Miami, FL 3,000 students
#162
Adlai Stevenson
Lincoln Shore, IL 4,349 students
#193
Lake Braddock**
Burk, VA 3,789 students
#194
Santigo H.S.
Coronz, CA 3,303 students
#253
Cypress Bay**
Weston, FL 3,980 students
#255
Montgomery Blair
#299
Lane Tech
#305
Westfield H.S.
#316
Diamond Bar H.S.
Diamond Bar, CA 3,110 students
#345
Cherry Creek H.S.
Greenwood Village, CO 3,501 students
#346
Arcadia H.S.
Arcadia, CA 3,610 students
#348
Walnut H.S.
Walnut, CA 2,920 students
#349
Bellaire H.S.
Bellaire, TX 3,377 students
#351
New Trier H.S.
Winnetka, IL 3,126 students
#366
Clements H.S.
Sugarland, TX 2,802 students
#376
Lamar, H.S.
#401
Palisades Charter H.S.
#423
Crescenta Valley H.S.
#452
Evanston Township H.S.
#467
The Woodland H.S. **
#499
Minnetonka H.S.
#516
Oak Park/River Forest H.S.
Silver Springs, MD 2,779 students Chicago, IL 4,192 students Chantilly, VA 2,951 students
Houston, TX 3,003 students Pacific Palisades, CA 2,869 students La Cresenta, CA 3,004 students Evanston, IL 2,887 students Woodlands, TX 3,795 students Minnetonka, MN 2,875 students Oak Park, IL 3,182 students
*”Best” = Based on student performance and college readiness ** = Also noted as a “Top 100 Largest High Schools in America” by highschoolguide.org – August 26, 2011. KL/ISD_284/102131/Community Task Force/ US News Best HS
Page 1
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities March 20, 2013 #545
Osbourn Park H.S.
Manassas, VA 2,753 students
#547
Carmel H.S.
#580
Cinco Ranch H.S.
#590
Boca Raton H.S.
Boca Raton, FL 2,818 students
#598
Winter Park H.S.
Winter Park, FL 3,172 students
#613
McNeil H.S.
#615
Seven Lakes H.S.
#618
Seminole H.S.
#626
Barrington H.S.
#633
San Clemente H.S.
#639
Evergreen H.S.
San Jose, CA 2,737 students
#646
Nequa Valley H.S.
Naperville, IL 4,397 students
#648
Wayzata H.S.
Wayzata, MN 3,248 students
#667
Norcross H.S.
Norcross, GA 2,959 students
#675
Bridgewater Rariton H.S.
#690
Clear Lake H.S.
Houston, TX 3,446 students
#703
Parkview H.S.
Lilburn, GA 2,712 students
#704
Bowie H.S.
#722
Peachtree Ridge H.S.
#728
Granada Hills Charter H.S. **
#731
Bentonville H.S.
Bentonville, AR 3,333 students
#734
Alhambra H.S.
Alhambra, CA 3,115 students
#755
Homewood-Flossmoor H.S.
Floosmoor, IL 2,845 students
#777
Capistrano Valley H.S.
#778
Berkmar H.S.
#786
Naperville North H.S.
#796
Keller H.S.
#814
Eden Prairie H.S.
Carmel, IN 4,389 students Katy, TX 2,872 students
Austin, TX 2,783 students Katy, TX 3,176 students Sanford, FL 3,340 students Barrington, IL 3,013 students San Clemente, CA 3,140 students
Bridgewater, NJ 2,863 students
Austin, TX 2,813 students Suwanee, GA 3,170 students Granada Hills, CA 4,143 students
Mission Viejo, CA 2,842 students Lilburn, GA 3,342 students Naperville, IL 3,145 students Keller, TX 2,805 students Eden Prairie, MN 3,262 students
*”Best” = Based on student performance and college readiness ** = Also noted as a “Top 100 Largest High Schools in America” by highschoolguide.org – August 26, 2011. KL/ISD_284/102131/Community Task Force/ US News Best HS
Page 2
Commission No. 102131
Independent School District #284 Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities March 20, 2013 #825
Eagle Rock H.S.
Los Angeles, CA 3,016 students
#836
Marcus H.S.
#842
Dana Hills H.S.
#849
Los Alamitos H.S.
#874
Lyons Township H.S.
#879
WM Mason H.S.
#885
Flower Mound H.S.
#892
Southwest Miami H.S.
#919
Hebron H.S.
#922
WM Fremd H.S.
Palatine, IL 2,854 students
#923
Grover Cleveland H.S. **
Reseda, CA 3,861 students
#930
El Camino H.S.
#945
Fountain Valley H.S.
#949
Dr. Michael Krop H.S.
#959
Otay Ranch Senior High
Chula Vista, CA 2,705 students
#960
Aliso Niguel H.S.
Aliso Viejo, CA 3,060 students
#964
La Quinta H.S.
#993
Cypress Woods H.S.
#998
A&M Cons H.S.
Flower Mound, TX 3,086 students Dana Point, CA 2,991 students Los Alamitos, GA 3,282 students La Grange, IL 3,812 students Mason, OH 3,043 students Flower Mound, TX 3,171 students Miami, FL 2,893 students Carrollton, TX 2,834 students
Oceanside, CA 3,190 students Fountain Valley, CA 3,282 students Miami, FL 3,249 students
La Quinta, CA 2,985 students Cypress, TX 3,158 students College Station, TX 2,730 students
*”Best” = Based on student performance and college readiness ** = Also noted as a “Top 100 Largest High Schools in America” by highschoolguide.org – August 26, 2011. KL/ISD_284/102131/Community Task Force/ US News Best HS
Page 3
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities APPENDIX K – PRELIMINARY TAX IMPACT / BONDING CONCEPT
May 20, 2013
Community Task Force on Facilities APPENDIX L – LIST OF NEEDS
May 20, 2013
Independent School District #284 - Wayzata Public Schools Community Taskforce on Facilities Draft: March 6, 2013 PHASE III: SECONDARY CAPACITY / EDUCATIONAL ADEQUACY (BOND REFERENDUM FALL 2013) BUDGET SCOPE WORKSHEET A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
High School Capacity Needs: 1. Core Size: Cafeteria / Auditorium lobby / Commons 2. Additional Classroom Capacity (onsite) Classrooms (8 classrooms / 8 labs) Support Spaces 3. Music Capacity 4. P.E. / Co-Curricular Capacity (2) Multi-purpose spaces / (2) Locker Rooms Gymnasium (2 Stations) Site Improvements Needs: 1. Capacity: Additional Land Adjacent to High School Campus (Portion of Former Elm Creek Golf Course – 36 Acres) 2. Safety: Another Site Entrance to High School 3. Parking / Relocation of Tennis, etc. 4. Development of New Fields Middle School Capacity Needs: 1. Capacity (Reallocate/remodel CMS space) 2. Move adults out of CMS (New Admin space elsewhere) 3. Locker Room Upgrades at Central Middle School 4. Parking/Entrance: MS/Family Learning Center Districtwide Infrastructure Needs: 1. Improved Greeter/Secure Entrances Elementary Schools (match Oakwood/Gleason Lake Model) Middle Schools (match Elementaries) 2. Energy Savings Upgrade Opportunities (Leverage Alt. Facilities) 3. Technology Infrastructure and Fiber Optic Redundancy Preparedness Needs: 21st Century Learning (where do we want to be in 10-20 years) 1. Districtwide Media Center Retrofits Elementary Schools (match Oakwood Model) Middle Schools High School (Media Center Upgrade) 2. Enhance Instruction: Districtwide Classroom Retrofits Furniture Technology Facility Upgrades for Excellence 1. High School Music / Performance Expansion 2. High School Small Theatre 3. Extended Use Synthetic Grass (2 fields at High School) 4. Light existing Fields (2 practice fields?) 5. High School Stadium Bathrooms 6. High School Gymnastics Needs/Additional Gym Elementary Capacity Needs: 1. Additional Elementary Capacity More Additions New Elementary (not including land) 2. Future Elementary Land (Assume purchase 23 Acres) Technology Needs: 1. Technology Levy ($2.6 mil + $1.9 mil increase)
KC/ISD_284/102131/rpts/ Phase III: Educational Adequacy pg40 Nums
Page 40
Commission No. 102131
Community Task Force on Facilities
May 20, 2013
APPENDIX M – WAYZATA HIGH SCHOOL CONCEPTUAL CAPACITY INCREASE DIAGRAM
POTENTIAL P.E. ADDITION 51,856 SF
GYMNASTICS / ROCK CLIMBING
Independent School District #284 Wayzata High School UPDATED DRAFT March 20, 2013
6,573 SF (2) LOCKER ROOMS
2 STATION GYMNASIUM DIVIDABLE W/ BLEACHERS
MULTI-PURPOSE: AEROBICS / DANCE TEAM / CHEERLEADING
HS CAPACITY ADDITION CONCEPTS
16,221 SF
5,640 SF
MULTI-PURPOSE: CARDIOVASCULAR 4,500 SF NEW CORE CAPACITY / CAFETERIA / STUDENT COMMONS
LOWER LEVEL
9,235 SF
POTENTIAL CORE CAPACITY/ CAFETERIA/COMMONS ADDITION 29,160 SF
POTENTIAL 4 STORY ACADEMIC CAPACITY ADDITION 54,000 SF - 82,600 SF
3 LEVELS STAFF/SUPPORT 1 LEVEL LAB 2,065 SF
NEW CIRCULATION EXIST CAFETERIA
7,058 SF
CR
T
CR
T LAB
CR
CR LAB LAB LAB NEW INSTRUMENT STORAGE
POTENTIAL MUSIC/PERFORMANCE 1,053 SF ADDITION NEW STAGE 28,650 SF
350 SEAT HOUSE
NEW LARGE REHEARSAL (BAND)
3,411 SF
3,581 SF
2,613 SF
3/20/2013 10:01:13 AM C:\_Revit_Project_Files\Wayzata HS(Central)_kschalow.rvt \\Minnesota\StPaul\ISD284\HS_Wayzata\122XXX Aud-Cafeteria Expansion\02_ARCH\Revit\Wayzata HS(Central).rvt
NEW UPPER DINING / LOBBY / STUDENT COMMONS
MAIN LEVEL PAGE 7 OVERALL FLOORPLANS
9,605 SF
Comm No: 102214
Community Task Force on Facilities APPENDIX N – TASKFORCE MEETING MINUTES
May 20, 2013