Preliminary Conceptual Facility Action Plan - Great Falls Public Schools

0 downloads 157 Views 905KB Size Report
Move the Preschool Program to the Paris Gibson Education Center West Wing. ..... Upgrade GFHS Career & Technical Edu
Preliminary Conceptual Facility Action Plan Great Falls Public Schools Board Approved: September 14, 2015 A conceptual plan to address increasing enrollment, aging buildings, safety and technology in Great Falls Public Schools.

1

Table of Contents FACILITY ISSUES DEFINED........................................................................................................................................................ 5 INCREASING ENROLLMENT ................................................................................................................................................. 5 BUILDING STATUS ............................................................................................................................................................... 5 TECHNOLOGY ...................................................................................................................................................................... 6 2013-2015 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT INFORMATION: ..................................................................................................... 6 FACILITY ISSUES ADDRESSED .................................................................................................................................................. 7 1. Upgrade Infrastructure in All K-8 Buildings (except Longfellow and Roosevelt), Skyline Center and Paris Gibson Education Center ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 PROJECT PURPOSE(S) ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 PROJECT OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................................................ 7 PROJECT RATIONALE ....................................................................................................................................................... 8 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES................................................................................................................. 9 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES: ............................................................................................................................................. 9 2.

Build a New School to Replace Roosevelt Elementary School .................................................................................. 10 PROJECT PURPOSE(S) .................................................................................................................................................... 10 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 10 PROJECT RATIONALE: .................................................................................................................................................... 10 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................... 11 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES AND PROPOSED FUNDING SOURCES................................................................................. 11

3.

Build a New School to Replace Longfellow Elementary School ................................................................................ 12 PROJECT PURPOSE(S) .................................................................................................................................................... 12 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 12 PROJECT RATIONALE ..................................................................................................................................................... 12 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................... 12 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES ............................................................................................................................................ 12

4.

Open Skyline as a 16th Elementary School .................................................................................................................... 13 PROJECT PURPOSE(S) .................................................................................................................................................... 13 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 13 PROJECT RATIONALE ..................................................................................................................................................... 13 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................... 13 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES: ........................................................................................................................................... 14

5.

Move the Preschool Program to the Paris Gibson Education Center West Wing. ....................................................... 15 PROJECT PURPOSE(S) .................................................................................................................................................... 15

2

PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 15 PROJECT RATIONALE ..................................................................................................................................................... 15 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................... 15 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES: ........................................................................................................................................... 15 6.

Upgrade Memorial Stadium .......................................................................................................................................... 16 PROJECT PURPOSE(S) .................................................................................................................................................... 16 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 16 PROJECT RATIONALE ..................................................................................................................................................... 16 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................... 16

7.

Upgrade CMR Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................................... 17 PROJECT PURPOSE(S) .................................................................................................................................................... 17 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 PROJECT RATIONALE ..................................................................................................................................................... 17 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................... 17 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES ............................................................................................................................................ 17 8.

Construct CMR Multipurpose Space and Track/Field Improvements ...................................................................... 18 PROJECT PURPOSE(S) .................................................................................................................................................... 18 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 PROJECT RATIONALE ..................................................................................................................................................... 18 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................... 18 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES ............................................................................................................................................ 18

9.

Upgrade GFHS Infrastructure .................................................................................................................................... 19 PROJECT PURPOSE(S) .................................................................................................................................................... 19 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 PROJECT RATIONALE ..................................................................................................................................................... 19 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................... 19 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES ............................................................................................................................................ 20

10.

Upgrade GFHS Classrooms .................................................................................................................................... 20

PROJECT PURPOSE(S) .................................................................................................................................................... 20 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 20 PROJECT RATIONALE ..................................................................................................................................................... 20 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................... 20 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES ............................................................................................................................................ 20

3

11.

Upgrade GFHS Career & Technical Education (CTE) Facilities .................................................................................. 21 PROJECT PURPOSE(S) .................................................................................................................................................... 21 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 21 PROJECT RATIONALE ..................................................................................................................................................... 21 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................... 21 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES ............................................................................................................................................ 21

12.

Upgrade GFHS Technology Infrastructure ................................................................................................................ 22 PROJECT PURPOSE(S) .................................................................................................................................................... 22 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 22 PROJECT RATIONALE ..................................................................................................................................................... 22 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................... 22 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES ............................................................................................................................................ 22

13.

Construct Additional GFHS Parking Spaces ............................................................................................................... 23 PROJECT PURPOSE(S) .................................................................................................................................................... 23 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 23 PROJECT RATIONALE ..................................................................................................................................................... 23 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................... 23 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES ............................................................................................................................................ 23

14.

Study the Feasibility of Constructing a Connector Building Between the GFHS Main Campus and South Campus 24 PROJECT PURPOSE(S) .................................................................................................................................................... 24 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 24 PROJECT RATIONALE ..................................................................................................................................................... 24 PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................... 24 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES ............................................................................................................................................ 24

4

FACILITY ISSUES DEFINED INCREASING ENROLLMENT Statement of Concern: Enrollment projections indicate continued growth in the student population over the next 5 years. That growth is estimated at another 413 students (188 in K-6, 164 in 7-8, and 61 in 9-12). This only uses current enrollment and birth rates as determining factors. It does not take into account economic growth in Great Falls that might bring in additional families/students. While these numbers are not huge, the increase at the elementary is of concern given the current number of overloaded classrooms. As of December 1, 2014, there are a total of 77 out of 260 (30%) K-6 classrooms overloaded according to accreditation standards. There are 68 out of 126 (54%) K-2 classrooms classified as overloaded according to accreditation standards. Through comment provided during the mill levy discussions with community members, many citizens of Great Falls indicate a preference for smaller class sizes as they feel it contributes to higher quality education. As of the October, 2014 count, 6 (40%) of the elementary schools are over their functional capacities. Due to accreditation factors and related FTE (library & counseling) and student management, GFPS has made it a priority to keep the elementary school enrollment below 500, which puts West and Meadowlark at enrollment capacity as well. If the District chooses to go over 500 students, there are financial implications related to staffing. At capacity then, are 8 (53%) of the elementary schools. Utilizing the functional capacity calculation, K-6 buildings can only grow by 97 students before, in total, elementary schools will be at capacity as K-6 is predicted to grow 188 students over the next 5 years.

BUILDING STATUS Statement of Concern: A major problem GFPS must face is the current and expected condition of the public’s educational buildings. There are 1.9 million square feet of building space in 27 buildings. The buildings are aged and are in need of upgrades and repairs. Some of these needs are critical, meaning they must be done in the very near future, while others can be timed out beyond 20 years. Building systems have a total life expectancy. Many of those systems within the District’s buildings have reached or are reaching the end of their life expectancies. Additionally, there is a need for additional multi-purpose space at C.M. Russell High School and shared community athletic spaces need to updated and maintained. Age of buildings: BUILDING ROOSEVELT GFHS WHITTIER LOWELL RUSSELL PARIS GIBSON LINCOLN LONGFELLOW WEST ELEMENTARY LEWIS & CLARK EAST MIDDLE SCHOOL DOB DOB ANNEX MEADOW LARK

DATE BUILT

AGE

1928 1931 1938 1939 1939 1948 1951 1952 1952 1953 1957 1959 1959 1960

87 84 77 76 76 67 64 63 63 62 58 56 56 55

BUILDING MORNINGSIDE RIVERVIEW SUNNYSIDE VALLEY VIEW CHIEF JOSEPH SACAJAWEA LOY WAREHOUSE CMR MOUNTAIN VIEW SKYLINE NORTH MIDDLE SCHOOL BISON FIELDHOUSE GROUNDS SHOP

DATE BUILT

AGE

1960 1960 1960 1960 1962 1962 1963 1964 1965 1970 1970 1970 1979 1989

55 55 55 55 53 53 52 51 50 45 45 45 36 26

5

TECHNOLOGY Statement of Concern: Over the last decade, GFPS has made significant investments in hardware, software, infrastructure, professional development, and support services. Currently, GFPS funds technology investments via a $225,000 perpetual annual technology levy, via E-rate and since the passage of the operational levy in 2014, $300,000 for software subscriptions. The costs of these investments continue to increase without the accompanying increases in funding. All of the GFPS buildings were built before the proliferation of technology. They are not equipped to handle the requirements of a technology rich environment that is currently required of schools. Fast and reliable wifi is a concern in some schools. The construction of some schools is so dense that wifi solutions are challenging. The age of the GFPS phone system is a concern. GFPS is tasked with finding a replacement communication system which will undoubtedly incur additional costs. The refresh schedule is not adequate. Currently GFPS is on a 7.5 year refresh schedule. This is added to refurbished machines that are already 2 years old when the District purchases them. There is also a concern regarding the number of cameras buildings are installing for safety purposes. As the technology changes, these will need to be refreshed and updated. The number of devices is expanding. This requires additional technical support as well as the need for professional coaching for the staff so that the devices are utilized to best support teaching and learning.

2013-2015 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT INFORMATION: Community Informational Meetings: Wednesday, February 25 – 5:30-7:30 – CMR Auditorium Monday, March 2 – 5:30–7:30 pm – Roosevelt gym Tuesday, March 10 – 5:30–7:30 pm – Longfellow cafeteria Wednesday, March 25 – 5:30-7:30 pm – GFH Auditorium Board Work Sessions: Monday, November 4, 2013, 5:00-8:00 – GFHS South Campus Tuesday, December 2, 2014, 5:00-7:00 – Aspen Wednesday, December 10, 2014, 4:30-6:30 – Aspen Monday, January 5, 2015, 4:30-6:30 – Aspen Monday, March 30, 2015, 5:30-7:30 – Aspen Monday, May 11, 2015, 6:30-8:30 – Aspen Monday, June 15, 2015, 5:30-7:30 – Aspen Tuesday, July 14, 2015, 5:30-7:30 – Aspen Tuesday, August 4, 2015, 5:30 -7:30 – Aspen Monday, August 17, 2015, 5:30-7:30 – Aspen Monday, August 31, 2015, 4:00-6:00 – Aspen 6

FACILITY ISSUES ADDRESSED 1. Upgrade Infrastructure in All K-8 Buildings (except Longfellow and Roosevelt), Skyline Center and Paris Gibson Education Center PROJECT PURPOSE(S):  Address infrastructure needs in these areas depending on the needs of the schools  In order to be compliant with the American Disabilities Act, install elevator and/or stairwell lifts so students, staff and the public with disabilities can access all levels. PROJECT OVERVIEW: These high priority infrastructure items have been identified in order to address the challenges presented by aging buildings:  Chief Joseph: Boiler ($150,037), HVAC ($214,076), Remodel Gym & Classroom Floors ($257,590), Building Accessibility/External Warning System ($12,214), Gym floor/Foundation ($750,000) TOTAL: $1,383,917  Lewis & Clark: HVAC Controls ($130,000), H&V coil #4 steam system ($10,628) TOTAL: $140,628  Lincoln: 2-Boilers ($235,000), Elevator/lift to connect K wing ($65,000), HVAC ($90,000) TOTAL: $390,000  Longfellow: Boiler ($168,247), Elevator to 2nd floor ($225,000), Steam traps ($245,138), Pneumatic control system upgrade ($150,037), Steam line replacement ($652,713), Line of site for main office ($4,000), Limited access protocols ($1,499), Repair crack in gym ($16,079), B-wing sinking ($750,000), Domestic water lines ($100,000) TOTAL: $2,312,713  Loy: 2-Boilers ($225,582), Excavation of lines under school covered by gumbo ($210,000), Parking area/bus route circular drive ($150,000), Upgrade electrical for computer lab (40,000) TOTAL: $625,582  Meadowlark: Boiler ($126,675), Parking Lot upgrade ($90,000) TOTAL: $216,675  Morningside: Upgrade electrical for computer lab ($40,000), HVAC Controls ($126,050), Repair settling walls ($250,000), Replace water line ($100,000) TOTAL: $516,050  Mountain View: Storage area converted to teaching space ($175,000) TOTAL: $175,000  Riverview: Sectional boilers ($217,073), HVAC Controls ($62,526) TOTAL: $279,599  Roosevelt: 2-Boilers ($231,728), Electrical upgrade ($50,000), Elevator ($300,000), Lower Fire Alarms to meet ADA ($12,493), Replace domestic water system ($150,000), Repair fire suppression system ($75,000), Roof ($500,000), Hallway breaker boxes ($3,705), Structural wall moving ($96,050), Dryvit Window panels ($20,000) TOTAL: $1,438,976  Sacajawea: 2-Boilers ($217,073) TOTAL: $217,073  Sunnyside: 2-Boilers ($205,127), Upgrade electrical for computer lab ($40,000) TOTAL: $245,127  West: Boiler tube replacement ($80,000), HVAC Controls ($296,624), Stairs outside auditorium ($75,000) TOTAL: $451,624  Valley View: 2-Boilers ($225,000) TOTAL: $225,000  Whittier: 2-Boilers ($243,747), Elevator ($225,000), Floor shifting ($100,000) TOTAL: $568,747  Skyline: 2-Boilers ($225,000) TOTAL: $225,000  EMS: Boilers ($225,000), Fire alarm system ($150,000), HVAC steam traps, valves and piping ($334,279), Roof repair ($28,834), Install emergency strobes in various locations ($40,806), Window retrofit ($950,000) TOTAL: $1,728,919

7

 

NMS: Boilers ($285,000), Doors replacement ($50,000), Fire alarm system ($160,788), Fire suppression system ($60,000), Roof ($500,000), Emergency strobe lights ($15,484), Foundation repair ($2,000,000), Automatic flushers to urinals ($71,193) TOTAL: $3,142,465 Paris Gibson Education Center: Install burner on Boiler #1 ($8,149), Replace exterior doors ($72,965), Elevator ($250,000), HVAC Controls ($426,738), Domestic water system replacement ($200,000), Extensive plumbing throughout building ($400,000), Shop roof ($60,130), Roof on main building ($650,000), Replace windows ($288,788), Cafeteria tables ($28,942) TOTAL: $2,385,712

PROJECT RATIONALE: The public indicated that a concerted effort is needed to address the infrastructural needs of every building. Each school’s projects are defended below:  Chief Joseph: This building has major structural and foundation issues caused by settling. The HVAC system needs to be updated. The pneumatic controls have major problems and will be replaced by a digital system.  Lewis and Clark: The HVAC system needs to be updated to digital controls to provide for better energy efficiency which will result in energy savings and the steam system needs repair.  Lincoln: The two boilers are original to the building and are far past life expectancy. There is currently a lift in the building, but it doesn’t serve the kindergarten wing.  Loy: The existing boiler is nearing end of life. Parking lot revisions provide a safer environment for parents, students, and buses. The school’s electrical system requires a new distribution panel to supply the needed circuits for the addition and expansion of computer labs, IDFs, and other technology endeavors. The steam and condensate lines as well as other infrastructure items need to be excavated as they are under soil deposited by flooding and are corroding very rapidly.  Meadow Lark: The existing boiler is nearing end of life. Parking lot upgrade will solve water run-off issues while providing better drop off and pick up of students along with additional parking.  Morningside: The HVAC system needs to be updated to digital controls to provide for better energy efficiency which will result in energy savings. Walls are in need of repair due to settling. The school’s electrical system requires a new distribution panel to supply the needed circuits for the expansion of technology and infrastructure. The water line continues to have breaks which necessitate a new water line.  Mountain View: A large and mostly unused space should be converted into an instructional/classroom space to increase the functional capacity.  Riverview: The boilers which are original to the building will be end of life in the next few years. The HVAC system needs to be updated to digital controls to provide for better energy efficiency which will result in energy savings.  Sacajawea: The boilers which are original to the building will be end of life in the next few years.  Sunnyside: The boilers which are original to the building will be end of life in the next few years. The school’s electrical system requires a new distribution panel to supply the needed circuits for the expansion of technology and infrastructure.  West: The boilers which are original to the building need to have the tubes replaced. The HVAC system needs to be updated to digital controls to provide for better energy efficiency which will result in energy savings. The stairs leading to the auditorium and used as the entrance/exit to the buses are steep, cracking and not handicap accessible.  Valley View: The boilers which are original to the building will be end of life in the next few years.  Whittier: The boilers will need to be replaced in the next few years. To meet the Americans for Disabilities Act (ADA), an elevator needs to be installed. Settling floors need to be repaired and leveled.

8

 





Skyline: The boilers which are original to the building will be end of life in the next few years. Other work has been identified if Skyline is to be converted to an elementary school. Those items and costs are delineated in that project description. East: Boilers will need to be replaced. A shop electrical upgrade is recommended for student safety. The Fire Alarm System is at its end of life. Major work needs to be done to steam traps, valves & piping which will pay back in energy savings. Hallway emergency strobes need to be installed to provide a safe environment for handicapped students including students who attend classes from the Montana School for the Deaf and Blind. Windows need to be replaced which will provide for energy savings and a learning environment with more natural light. North: Boilers are original to the building and are nearing end of life. The main walkway & doors are in need of replacement. The Fire Alarm system is nearing end of life. Roof repair will keep water out of the building. Strobe lights need to be installed in high noise classrooms, which include shop and music, for notification purposes. The building has faced foundation shifting which causes the need for stabilization and repair. Paris Gibson Education Center: The exterior doors no longer close tightly and are in need of replacement. To meet the Americans for Disabilities Act (ADA), an elevator needs to be installed. The HVAC system needs to be updated to digital controls to provide for better energy efficiency which will result in energy savings. The heating and plumbing piping, drains, vents, and fittings are corroded to such an extent that most can no longer be feasibly repaired, but must be replaced. There are major roof repairs needed to keep water and mold out of the building. Windows need to be replaced which will provide for energy savings and a learning environment with more natural light. The tables in the cafeteria are heavily used by the district for events and they therefore need to be updated.

PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  Work will need to be spread out over time so the least amount of disruption during the school year  Will require passage of a bond/building reserve levy.  The lists above do not include any and all work to be done. Ongoing repair and maintenance from current budgets are assumed.  The identified projects are those identified to be completed within a 10-year timeframe. There will be other infrastructure needs and requirements beyond the 10 years. GFHS and CMR have been estimated in separate proposals. PROJECT COST ESTIMATES:  PK-6 excluding Longfellow and Roosevelt  Middle Schools  PGEC  Total a K-8 (excluding LF and RS), Skyline and PGEC upgrades

$ 5,660,022 $ 4,871,384 $ 2,385,712 $12,917,118

9

2. Build a New School to Replace Roosevelt Elementary School PROJECT PURPOSE(S):  Construct a modern elementary school to replace an 86-year old building in a safer location. The main option discussed has been the current Building and Grounds Headquarters at the old Lowell Elementary School. Other site options might be available and should be explored. PROJECT OVERVIEW:  Upgrade Little Russell (2615 Central Ave. W.) o Fix sewer o Upgrade boiler that is original to building o Install ductwork for ventilation required for paint and carpentry shop o Update restroom facilities o Upgrade phone system o Create office spaces o Build a steel building – 80’ x 180’  Relocate current programs and departments housed at Lowell (3117 5th Ave. N.) to Little Russell  Relocate Buildings and Grounds (B&G) located at the District Office Building (DOB) to Little Russell  Upgrade current B&G space at the DOB to accommodate Environmental Education & Technology o 3 spaces for Environmental Education (1 instruction, 2 supply and storage) o 2 spaces for staging and supply/storage space for Technology  Relocate Environmental Ed and Technology to the new DOB spaces  Demolish Lowell  Construct a new school on the 5th Ave. N. property PROJECT RATIONALE:  It makes sense to build a replacement building for Roosevelt. o It is 87 years old and its infrastructure is suffering from age. A very conservative estimate of repairs that need to done in the next 10 years is over $1M with more anticipated to include major plumbing and structural fixes. o It is not a viable educational building for another 50 years. o The location of Roosevelt, surrounded by 3 heavily trafficked one-ways, is less than ideal. There are safety issues for students and parents due to the traffic. o Enrollment is projected to slightly increase and this northside neighborhood has affordable housing which leads to predictions that this will continue to be a family-oriented area. o Annual operational savings will occur because the building will include many modern energy saving measures.  It makes sense to build the replacement building at Lowell. o The District already owns the property. o Relocation of current departments and programs at Lowell is possible. o It is only 9 blocks between the two sites so it is still within the neighborhood.  It makes sense to relocate all B&G departments to Little Russell. o Better coordination of efforts o The amount of space available is conducive to this department’s needs.  It makes sense to relocate Environmental Education & Technology to the DOB. o Both programs require significant numbers of items to be run through the warehouse and then trucked to either Lowell or Little Russell. With this configuration, the amount of trucking required would be significantly reduced. This is a cost savings. 10

o This would put both programs with the rest of their departments which allows for better coordination of efforts. Other site options might be available and should be explored. PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  Little Russell is not centrally located so there will be travel time from the westside to eastside. This can be mitigated by proper dispatching.  Boundaries may need to be reviewed and there may be bussing/transportation implications.  Will require passage of a bond/building reserve levy.  Preschool opportunities should be considered. PROJECT COST ESTIMATES AND PROPOSED FUNDING SOURCES:    

Costs associated with Little Russell reconfiguration - $1,000,000 Costs associated with DOB B&G change to Environmental Ed & Technology - $200,000 Demolition of Lowell and construction of new school - $15M Moving expenses – TBD

Building Reserve Levy

TOTAL

$16.2M

Building Reserve Levy Bond Levy Existing Sources

11

3. Build a New School to Replace Longfellow Elementary School PROJECT PURPOSE(S):  Construct a modern elementary school to replace an 62-year old building with considerable structural concerns PROJECT OVERVIEW:  Relocate Longfellow students to: o Option 1: Roosevelt Elementary once they have moved to new school o Option 2: Put Longfellow into the new school until the new Longfellow is built  Demolish current building  Construct a new school on the same Longfellow site  Native American Library relocation from Paris Gibson to the new Longfellow PROJECT RATIONALE:  It makes sense to build a replacement building for Longfellow. o It is 62 years old and its infrastructure is suffering from age and from structural issues caused by an unstable foundation. A very conservative estimate of repairs that need to done in the next 10 years is over $2.3M with little confidence that the repairs will fix the foundational issues. o It is not a viable educational building for another 50 years. o The location of Longfellow is strategic. It serves a low-income neighborhood and is easily accessible on foot or by public transportation. It serves as a “community center” for this neighborhood. o Enrollment is projected to increase and this southside neighborhood has low-income housing which leads to predictions that this will continue to be a family-oriented area.  It makes sense to build the replacement building on its current site. o The District already owns the property. o Modern engineering can solve the foundational issues that exist. o With the right design, an even better community center concept could be built. o With a cultural center emphasis (Native American Library), grants may be available. o Annual operational savings will occur because the building will include many modern energy saving measures. PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  Timing would require the relocation of the entire student body to a different location while the new school is built. There is not enough lot space to build and have school in the current building. o Option: Relocate to the current Roosevelt school once that student body has been moved to its new school. o Transportation will be an issue during this phase.  Boundaries may need to be reviewed.  Will require passage of a bond/building reserve levy.  Headstart and preschool opportunities should be considered. PROJECT COST ESTIMATES:  Demolition of Longfellow and construction of new school - $15M  Moving expenses TOTAL

Bond Levy Existing Resources $15M 12

4. Open Skyline as a 16th Elementary School PROJECT PURPOSE(S):  Address increasing enrollment at the elementary level PROJECT OVERVIEW:  Prepare Skyline to return as an elementary school. See rationale below.  Update Skyline to a modern elementary school facility.  Expand Skyline from 19 to 25 classrooms (Functional capacity from 335 to 440).  Relocate the GFPS preschool programming to the west wing of Paris Gibson Education Center.  End leases with Headstart, the MSU Extension Service, and the Parent Participation Preschool. PROJECT RATIONALE: It makes sense to consider this approach because:  Skyline was originally designed as an elementary school when it was built in 1970. It is one of the District’s newest buildings.  Growth is happening on the westside. New housing developments are proposed in the Skyline area.  Opening Skyline as the 16th elementary school would necessitate boundary changes that would relieve the number of westside classrooms that exceed standards and allow for additional classroom space as well. Other boundary adjustments could be made at the same time throughout the city to reduce the number other classrooms that exceed standards.  The new Roosevelt school can be built with a larger functional capacity than it currently has to add more classrooms in that part of the city in the potential near future.  The disruption to current K-6 programs would be minimal. This eliminates the probable debate from the factions in our community that do not want 6th grades in middle schools. It allows for more focused discussions on the facility needs instead of programmatic needs.  The functional capacities at the two middle schools have plenty of room for the larger 7th and 8th grade classes that are projected up to the 2020/2021 school year.  Should the predicted enrollment increases not continue, it is easier to reduce the number of elementary schools than a 3rd middle school again.  Should the enrollment increases continue or exceed predictions, discussions could begin regarding a 3rd middle school at that time.  A 16th elementary school would result in another $50,000 basic entitlement payment from the State. PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  Requires the continued study of opening a 3rd middle school in the future.  Requires the relocation of the GFPS preschool and associated moving costs.  Requires the termination of leases with Headstart, the MSU Extension Agency and the Parent Participation preschool. This will result in a loss of revenue.  Relocation of preschool to PGEC requires some facility upgrades at PGEC which is an added expense.  Requires additional on-going funding for elementary school staffing which are significant.  Requires change in boundaries for most elementary schools.  Requires significant bussing and transportation modifications.  Due to Skyline being repurposed into other educational configurations since its closure as an elementary school in 1979, it will require major renovations and new construction.

13

PROJECT COST ESTIMATES: Building Costs:  Gymnasium addition (metal structure w/ storage & restrooms) $ 800,000  Drop off pick-up area for parents/students (sidewalks) $ 60,000  Carpet $ 100,000  Addition and removal of interior walls (Includes electrical): $ 300,000  Fire Alarm upgrades $ 60,000  Intercom updates $ 30,000  Data $ 50,000  Air Conditioning $ 200,000  Blacktop resurfacing $ 100,000  Enlarge kitchen area $ 75,000  Furniture Estimate ($5,400 per room x 19) $ 135,000  Library materials (Books, Shelves) $ TBD  Playground equipment $ 80,000  7 new classrooms, restrooms, computer lab $1,400,000 TOTAL $3,390,000

New Elementary Staffing Costs:  Principal  Administrative Assistant  Counselor/Music/Art/Library/PE  Classroom Teachers (12)  Custodians  Aides  Elementary Entitlement TOTAL

$ 95,000 $ 35,000 $ 200,000 $ 600,000 $ 50,000 $ 40,000 ($ 50,000) $ 970,000

14

5. Move the Preschool Program to the Paris Gibson Education Center West Wing. PROJECT PURPOSE(S):  Address increasing enrollment at the elementary level by opening the current preschool location as an elementary school and relocating the preschool to a new location PROJECT OVERVIEW: Relocate the GFPS preschool programming to the west wing of Paris Gibson Education Center. PROJECT RATIONALE: It makes sense to consider this approach because:  There is enough space at PGEC for both the current number of preschool students and classrooms and also for the eventual expansion of preschool through the Preschool Expansion Grant and the potential expansion through Early Edge legislative action.  PGEC is closely located to the neighborhoods where current preschool students live.  This is space the district already owns and is not currently utilized to its full potential.  There is room on the grounds for two small playgrounds and a safe bus drive through and pick-up area.  There is ample parking for preschool staff and parents.  The preschool would fit nicely with the Young Parents Education Center daycare already located at PGEC.  The proximity to PGEC and GFHS allows for high school student internships for those interested in pursuing careers in early childhood. PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  Relocation of preschool to PGEC requires some facility upgrades at PGEC which is an added expense.  An elevator is required for 2nd floor access for the additional students and staff PROJECT COST ESTIMATES: Paris Gibson West Wing Conversion & Elevator Bathroom remodels and classroom modifications Elevator & 2 Stair Lifts TOTAL

$ 75,000 $ 375,000 $ 450,000

15

6. Upgrade Memorial Stadium PROJECT PURPOSE(S):  Address the need for upgrades and repairs to District athletic facilities PROJECT OVERVIEW:  Install artificial turf on memorial field  Resurface the Memorial Stadium track PROJECT RATIONALE:  Artificial turf offers: o Lower maintenance costs o No pesticides or fertilizers o Fewer injuries o Water savings o Increased playing time and field access o Eliminates the need for periodic “Crowning” of natural field surface (expensive)  It makes sense that the Memorial track would be resurfaced at the same time that the field is being renovated due to the extensive nature of that construction.  The track needs to be periodically resurfaced due to: o The heavy use and wear over time o Freezing and thawing effects the subsurface and overcoat layers PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  The timing of the construction of Memorial Field would be crucial for football season. If the construction began as soon as the spring track season ended, the field would be complete for the fall football season.  If artificial turf is not installed, the surface needs to be crowned in the near future.  The proposed upgrades will provide improved opportunities for both high schools and extended access by the community for Memorial Field use.  The proposed projects can be partially paid for by reserve funds that the district is currently holding. However, the remaining costs will require passage of a bond/building reserve levy. PROJECT COST ESTIMATES AND PROPOSED FUNDING SOURCES: Area Cost Artificial turf Memorial Stadium $800,000 Track upgrades at Memorial Stadium $225,000 Total

$1,025,000

Sources of Funding: Existing Reserve Funds: $300,000 Revenue Enhancement Fund + $200,000 Facility Upgrade - $180,000 CMR Tennis Court Upgrade____ $320,000 Total Reserves Bond or Building Reserve Levy: $705,000 16

C.M. Russell High School Concepts 7. Upgrade CMR Infrastructure

PROJECT PURPOSE(S):  Address the infrastructure, safety and technology needs of a 50-year old building PROJECT OVERVIEW:  Upgrades in the heating and ventilation system will be completed and commissioned.  Replacement of pipes, valves and pumps throughout the building.  Upgrade current fire alarm system  Fix foundation issues that have arisen due to the building settling  Upgrade technology infrastructure  Cement work surrounding the campus  Replacement of plastic panels around windows PROJECT RATIONALE: As CMR has celebrated its 50th birthday, it is time to upgrade.  It makes sense to upgrade HVAC, plumbing and water main to ensure: o A comfortable learning environment o Efficient and cost effective ways of heating the buildings o Water and toilets are available to building inhabitants  It makes sense to upgrade the fire alarm system to bring the building up to current safety expectations  It makes sense to fix foundation and cement/sidewalk issues to repair current problems and prevent further issues associated with settlement.  It makes sense to repair/replace the elevator to comply with ADA specifications. Future repairs will only become more costly  While some doors have been replaced, there are many others that need to be upgraded in order to provide safe and secure barriers to intruders and the elements  The wear and tear on lockers is significant as students access them six to seven times per day. PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  Safety and security issues during construction  Maintaining an instructional environment during construction  Upgrades and renovations are expensive and sometimes uncover unknowns  Requires passage of a bond or building reserve levy PROJECT COST ESTIMATES: Infrastructure Repair & Updates:

Cost

HVAC Plumbing Fire alarm Water main replacement Elevator Repair Doors/Locks Foundation repairs Sidewalks Windows

$53,864 $250,000 $300,000 $100,000 $200,000 $125,000 $1,048,171 $60,000 $40,000

Lockers: 300 lockers x $250 Subtotal

$750,000 $2,927,035

17 Technology is an additional need that has not been addressed in these estimates.

8. Construct CMR Multipurpose Space and Track/Field Improvements PROJECT PURPOSE(S):  Provide additional space for student activities and community access that are part of GFPS comprehensive educational programming PROJECT OVERVIEW:  Construction of a two-story multipurpose space to include an athletic practice facility. o Located adjacent to the current fieldhouse o Connected to current gym for shared access to locker rooms, etc.  Refurbish track and Pride Field PROJECT RATIONALE: As CMR celebrates its 50th birthday, it is time to upgrade.  It makes sense to build a multi-purpose learning space because: o Gym practice space is minimal and in dire need (some teams practice at West and PGEC) o Visitor gathering area and concessions area inadequate o Inadequate wrestling practice area o In adequate/antiquated weight and workout facilities for AA competition o This need was identified in 1991 with no progress on a solution  It makes sense to refurbish the track and Pride Field o Due to the proximity of the track and field to the anticipated multipurpose space construction, it is anticipated that there will be some disruption to the surfaces so repair will need to be done anyway. o Pride Field is the site of all sub-varsity CMR football games and is the varsity practice field so it gets a lot of play and use. o Health enhancement classes also use it when the weather is nice but they are not able to use Pride Field in the spring due to the fragile nature of the grass. o The track has not seen a major renovation since being built in approximately 1968. Putting an all-weather surface on it will create a versatile environment for years to come. o Creating a level grade between the track and football field increases safety. PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  Safety and Security issues during construction  Maintaining an instructional environment during construction  Comparability with other AA school environments PROJECT COST ESTIMATES: Multi-purpose space Track and field upgrades Subtotal

$5,750,000 $250,000 $6,000,000

18

Great Falls High School Concepts Note: The concepts and estimates provided for GFHS were derived from a GFHS Facility Study that was conducted by the GFHS Facility Task Force over a two-year period, 20102012. The District hired a consulting firm to conduct this study. The study results are available for review.

9. Upgrade GFHS Infrastructure PROJECT PURPOSE(S): To improve the educational environment and safety:  Address infrastructure needs in the areas of heating and ventilation (HVAC), electricity, & plumbing  Increase natural lighting through a window replacement project PROJECT OVERVIEW:  A new heating and ventilation system will be installed and commissioned.  Replacement of electrical receptacles, circuits and breakers throughout the building.  Replacement of pipes, sinks, toilets and water fountains throughout the building.  Provide support and matching funds for community effort for new windows PROJECT RATIONALE: As the public indicated that they preferred to upgrade GFHS instead of building a new high school, the scope of the work is large but necessary.  It makes sense to upgrade HVAC, electricity and plumbing to ensure: o A comfortable learning environment o Efficient and cost effective ways of heating the buildings o Adequate electrical infrastructure for modern technology and electrical needs o Water and toilets are available to building inhabitants  It makes sense to replace the windows because: o Natural light creates a better learning environment o They improve the outside aesthetics of the building o There is community support of this project PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  Updating a building listed on the Historical Register is expensive  Historical preservation will need to be evaluated and considered for all projects  Work will need to be phased to ensure the least amount of disruption during the school year  Requires a plan for temporary student locations during construction  To do all projects, will need other sources of funding. For example, window replacement via private donations is assumed. This plan assumes there will be private donations for some projects.

19

PROJECT COST ESTIMATES: Infrastructure Repair & Updates: HVAC Electrical Plumbing Sidewalks Doors and Locks Roof Windows Temp Locations Total

Costs $6,360,179 $3,500,000 $552,000 $50,000 $60,360 $625,000 $1,000,000 $850,000 $12,997,539

10. Upgrade GFHS Classrooms PROJECT PURPOSE(S): To improve the educational environment and safety:  Create a 21st century learning environment. PROJECT OVERVIEW:  Remodel of classrooms in conjunction with the HVAC, electrical, plumbing and technology upgrades PROJECT RATIONALE: As the public indicated that they preferred to upgrade GFHS instead of building a new high school, the scope of the work is large but necessary.  It makes sense to remodel classrooms as the HVAC, electrical, plumbing and technology upgrades happen: o Access to these items will necessitate some destruction of current walls, cabinets, etc. o This will modernize classrooms and make them viable for years to come PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  Updating a building listed on the Historical Register is expensive  Historical preservation will need to be evaluated and considered for all projects  Work will need to be phased to ensure the least amount of disruption during the school year  Requires a plan for temporary student locations during construction PROJECT COST ESTIMATES: Classrooms Upgrades

$10,080,000

20

11.

Upgrade GFHS Career & Technical Education (CTE) Facilities

PROJECT PURPOSE(S):  Upgrade Career and Technical Education (CTE) learning spaces PROJECT OVERVIEW:  Construction of a new Career and Technical Education (CTE) facility to be located on the GFHS campus PROJECT RATIONALE:  It makes sense to build a new CTE facility because: o Current building space is inadequate for current program needs, i.e welding and metals manufacturing, construction technology program, etc. o The current facility does not allow for flexibility of programmatic changes as workforce training demands change o The existing building construction is of poor quality o There is inadequate project and material storage space  Potential building sites include: o On the eastside of Swarthout Fieldhouse in the current senior parking lot o On the southside of South Campus o Reconstruction where the current IT building is located o Between the Main Campus and South Campus as part of a *connector structure between the two buildings  It makes sense to build a connector between the two buildings because:  There are safety needs that must be addressed o The passage between the two buildings from November through March at times can be treacherous due to the slope, northside shading and the propensity for ice accumulation. o Safety and security will be enhanced during a lockdown. o It would allow for a single point of entrance for emergency responders  There are student and public flow needs that need to be addressed o Due to the use of the facility for a variety of reasons, the flow between the two buildings should be easier and more comfortable  The handicapped accessibility needs to be improved to both buildings  Curriculum programs (STEM) and school operations can be located in the connector, freeing up areas in the existing building for enlargement of classrooms and enhancement of current learning space. * The connector concept is also addressed as a separate concept. PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  Historical preservation will need to be evaluated and considered for all projects  Work will need to be phased to ensure the least amount of disruption during the school year  Requires a plan for temporary student locations during construction  Requires passage of a bond or building reserve levy PROJECT COST ESTIMATES: The District has estimated the cost of constructing a new CTE facility at $5,200,000. This estimate must be verified once decisions are made as to the best placement of the new construction. Decisions must also be made regarding the repurposing or demolition of the current CTE building. 21

12.

Upgrade GFHS Technology Infrastructure

PROJECT PURPOSE(S):  Create a 21st century learning environment PROJECT OVERVIEW:  Upgrade the fiber backbone and infrastructure for current and future bandwidth demands o Requires Fiber mainline in building and fiber peripheral to each class room o Central hub and switches with terminal locations to accommodate fiber in each classroom o Projection devices and flexible technology in classrooms for more versatility in teaching (EX. Room 107 GFHS  Accessible and Versatile wireless throughout the common spaces for student, faculty and visitor use for teaching and learning  Phone system integrated with data and tech systems (VOP) PROJECT RATIONALE:  It makes sense to upgrade the GFHS technological footprint because: o Original building construction has posed major hurdles and restrictions to current upgrades o To do so during major reconstruction of classroom and common space makes sense o A (fiber) backbone to support technology into the foreseeable future of the high school will pay off in the long run o Flexible access to technology will drive versatility of instruction o Students are engaged when teachers plan effective use of integrated technology and when technology is available “on demand” for students and instructors PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  Historical preservation will need to be evaluated and considered for all projects  Work will need to be phased to ensure the least amount of disruption during the school year PROJECT COST ESTIMATES: The District has estimated the cost of upgrading the technology infrastructure at $3,520,000. (Note: the original GFHS facility plan included $5,520,000 for technology. In order to reduce the total amount allocated to GFHS, this category was reduced by $2M so some of the systems envisioned may be comprised by this reduction.)

22

13.

Construct Additional GFHS Parking Spaces

PROJECT PURPOSE(S):  To address parking and access concerns PROJECT OVERVIEW:  Develop new parking areas o Utilize a portion of the current football practice field o Other PROJECT RATIONALE: It makes sense to establish additional parking because:  The availability of parking is inadequate and estimated at 310 spaces short of what is needed  Special event parking is especially problematic  Will increase the safety of students, staff, neighbors and visitors PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  May need to utilize current green spaces  May need to secure additional land  Requires passage of a bond or building reserve levy PROJECT COST ESTIMATES: The District has estimated the cost of creating 310 more parking spaces at $975,000

23

14.

Study the Feasibility of Constructing a Connector Building Between the GFHS Main Campus and South Campus

NOTE: The Board of Trustees feel that further study on this concept is required. The information below was proposed by the Superintendent’s Cabinet as a result of the work done by the Great Falls High School Facility Task Force. The ideas below are for discussion purposes only. PROJECT PURPOSE(S):  Address safety issues to include student/staff/public travel between the Main and South Campus  Provide additional learning and/or student gathering space PROJECT OVERVIEW:  Construction of a connector between the Main Campus and South Campus. PROJECT RATIONALE:  It makes sense to build a connector between the two buildings because: o There are safety needs that must be addressed  The passage between the two buildings from November through March at times can be treacherous due to the slope, northside shading and the propensity for ice accumulation.  Safety and security will be enhanced during a lockdown.  It would allow for a single point of entrance for emergency responders o There are student and public flow needs that need to be addressed  Due to the use of the facility for a variety of reasons, the flow between the two buildings should be easier and more comfortable o The handicapped accessibility needs to be improved to both buildings o Curriculum programs (STEM) and school operations can be located in the connector, freeing up areas in the existing building for enlargement of classrooms and enhancement of current learning space. *See GFHS CTE concept for additional information. PROJECT IMPACTS AND/OR CONSEQUENCES:  Historical preservation will need to be evaluated and considered for all projects  Work will need to be phased to ensure the least amount of disruption during the school year  Requires a plan for temporary student locations during construction PROJECT COST ESTIMATES: Connector

$7,000,000

24