Update to 2007 Facilities Assessment and Current Proposal Board of Trustees Workshop June 21, 2012...
-
Upload
lilian-shaw -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of Update to 2007 Facilities Assessment and Current Proposal Board of Trustees Workshop June 21, 2012...
Update to 2007 Facilities Assessment and Current Proposal
Board of Trustees Workshop
June 21, 2012
Photos of students and a lab/classroom setting
Agenda
2
Background Process Findings Proposal
Parsons Team
National experts + local knowledge Parsons Planning & Assessment
MGT of America Educational Suitability
Natex Architects * One-line Drawings
Bovay Engineers * Assessment
CBIC * Assessment
Marshall Engineering * Assessment
PGAL Assessment
One World Strategy Group * Communications* M/WBE Firm
3
Background: Scope of Work
Phase 1 of HISD Facility Master Plan
Update 2007 Facility Database
Gather Community Input
Identify Schools to Assess
Propose Facility Improvements
Develop Budget Proposal
4
Background: Overview of Previous Facilities Programs
5
1998: Rebuild 2002 Designed to relieve overcrowding and address fire and life-safety issues
2002: Rebuild HISD Focused on replacement of obsolete facilities and technology upgrades
2007: HISD Bond Proposal 2007Proposed to enhance security at all schools, improve science labs, replace obsolete facilities, and improve schools not covered in past programs
Background: Overview of Previous Facilities Programs
6
Background: HISD Facilities by Age
7
Background: HISD Schools Built by Decade and Level
8
Baby Boomers
Growth of the Suburbs
Rebuild Houston
Significant Focus on Primary Schools
Background: Current Situation
Earlier facility improvement efforts focused on the ELEMENTARY LEVEL
Commitment to maintain and improve neighborhood schools at the SECONDARY SCHOOL LEVEL
Need to match facilities to PORTFOLIO of PROGRAMS
9
Agenda
10
Background Process
Solicit Community Input Review and Align Standards Review Capacity Data Conduct Assessments
Findings Proposal
Putting the Pieces Together
11
Solicit School Community Input
Solicit School Community Input
Review Enrollment Projections, Capacity
and Utilization
Review Enrollment Projections, Capacity
and Utilization
Review and Align Educational
Suitability and Technology Standards
Review and Align Educational
Suitability and Technology Standards
Conduct Facility Assessments
Solicit School Community Input
GOAL: Broad-based participation at each site
PROCESS: ALL schools invited to provide input Principals sent “Packet” to facilitate school
community input Tool available for more than 6 weeks Sign-in sheets Group information Ensure that every voice is recorded
12
Community
Solicit School Community Input
Data Gathering Tool - Example
Q2. What is your level of satisfaction with the overall physical condition of the buildings at your school?
Satisfied Somewhat satisfied Dissatisfied
Q3. Please explain why you are satisfied or
dissatisfied
13
Community
Solicit School Community Input
RESULTS:
14
95% response rate237 schools and 3,302 participants
Q2: What is your level of satisfaction with the overall physical condition of the buildings at your school?
•Satisfied 19%•Somewhat satisfied 32%•Dissatisfied 48%
Community
Solicit School Community Input
RESULTS:
15
Q3. Please explain why you are:
Satisfied: “We have a brand new school that is beautiful.”
Somewhat satisfied : “The new building looks nice, but the old building needs a lot of renovations.”
Dissatisfied : “There are water leaks and there is constant repair on the same issues.”
Community
Solicit School Community Input
RESULTS WILL BE USED FOR: Developing priorities and Proposal:
HISD Maintenance Department Planning Capital Improvement Planning Long-Range Facility Master Planning
16
Community
Review and Align Educational Suitability and Technology Standards
GOAL: Understand current and future district goals PROCESS:
Conduct focus groups and interviews with HISD experts Apply national experience/TEA Standards Align Assessment Tool to existing HISD Educational
Specifications Create Educational Suitability and Technology
Assessment Tools
17
Standards
Review and Align Educational Suitability and Technology Standards
Assessment Tool Learning Environment Room Size Location Storage and Equipment Technology
18
Standards
Review Enrollment Projections, Capacity and Utilization
Gather HISD demographics and
enrollment data Evaluate current utilization rates: permanent spaces Examine future utilization scenarios
Effect of Improved Facilities Program Offerings Community Changes Enrollment Growth / Decline
19
Utilization
Conduct Facility Assessments
GOAL: Use existing information and gather new data to identify current facility needs
PROCESS:
Conduct Desktop Modeling Activity Update scores based on changes since 2007 Develop Composite Score for each school
Conduct Field Assessments Validate current conditions Update data and drawings
20
Assessment
Conduct Facility Assessments
.
Desktop Composite Score - Examples
21
School Name ConditionScore
Suitability and Technology
Composite Score
Score Weighting Formula
50% 50% 100%
School A 50 72 61School B 37 63 50School C 82 92 87
Assessment
Conduct Field Assessments
3 Areas of Review: Condition Educational Suitability Technology Readiness
Site Visit Process Interview Principal and Plant Operators Walk the buildings and site
22
Assessment
Agenda
23
Background Process Findings
School Community Findings
Educational Suitability and Technology Findings
Facility Themes Proposal
FINDINGS: School Community Input (N= 3,302)
24
FINDINGS: School Community Input
25
Issue Most Frequently Identified
Condition Repairs Needed
HVAC Plumbing Technology Parking
Educational Suitability
ImprovementsRestrooms General
ClassroomsGym andAthletics
Auditorium/ Stage
Safety Issues Parent/Bus Parking Multiple Entrances
Building Configuration
FINDINGS: Educational Suitability Review
General classrooms, Tech labs, and special education rooms do not meet current standards
Traffic and parking are a problem
Schools are not designed for easy supervision and control of entrances
Lack of storage
26
FINDINGS: Technology Readiness Review
Electrical service is insufficient in older schools
Schools lack video distribution systems
Communications / IT equipment is housed inappropriately
Equipment is not up to date
HOWEVER, with recent work, network connectivity and performance are greatly improved
27
Themes
High schools are “due”
Reinvest in neighborhoods
Match facility to program
“Build it and they will come”
Finish last phase of earlier projects
Maintain our heritage into the future
Provide technology upgrades
Revitalize appearance and capabilities
28
Agenda
29
Background Process Findings Proposal
Proposal
30
High School Focus:
Replace existing schools
Replace Inadequate Facilities
Replace Inadequate Facilities and Renovate
Build New Schools
Renovate
Proposal
31
K-8: Facilities Match Program
Middle School Needs
Elementary School Needs
District-wide Needs
High School Focus: Replacements: $577,067,000
32
Furr High SchoolHigh School for Performing and Visual Arts
Lee High School
Madison High School
Sharpstown High School
Sterling High School
Washington High School
Yates High School
High School Focus: Replace Inadequate Facilities: $353,696,000
33
Bellaire High School
Lamar High School
Sam Houston High School
Westbury High School
High School Focus: Replace Inadequate Facilities and Renovate:
$258,953,000
34
Austin High School
Eastwood Academy
Milby High School
Waltrip High School
Worthing High School
High School Focus: New Schools: $27,000,000
35
North Early College High School
South Early College High School
High School Focus: Renovations: $61,125,000
36
Davis High School
DeBakey High School
Jones High School
Jordan High School
Kashmere High School
Scarborough High School
Sharpstown International High School
Young Men’s College Prep
Young Women’s College Prep
K-8: Facilities Match Program: $120,732,000
37
Garden Oaks Elementary School
Pilgrim Academy
Wharton Dual Language School
K-8: Completion
Mandarin Chinese Language Immersion Magnet School at Gordon
K-8: Replacement
Middle Schools: Meeting Needs: $73,950,000
38
Dowling Middle School
Middle School: Replacement
Grady Middle School
Middle School: Addition
Elementary Schools: Replacements: $126,248,000
39
Askew Elementary School
Condit Elementary School
Kelso Elementary School
MacGregor Elementary School
Parker Elementary School
Elementary Schools: Meeting Needs: $67,347,000
40
Smith, K. Elementary School
Elementary School: Renovation and Addition
Elementary School: New
New Elementary School
Location: TBD
Elementary School: Replace Inadequate Facilities and Renovate
Tijarena Elementary School
District-Wide Needs: $224,675,000
41
Safety and Security Improvements
Technology Improvements: Equipment and Infrastructure
Restroom Renovations: Middle Schools
Athletic Improvements: Field Houses
Land Acquisitions
Proposal Summary
42
High School Focus $1,277,841,000
K-8: Facilities Match Program $120,732,000
Middle Schools: Meeting Needs $73,950,000
Elementary Schools: Meeting Needs $193,595,000
District-wide Needs $224,675,000
Grand Total $1,890,793,000
Questions
Thank you
43