during the past thirty years, the programs in a public

Preliminary ReportJune 16, 2005

NEEDS ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS On behalf of DeJONG and JAED we extend our appreciation to the Needs Assessment Committee, the Shelby County Commission, Memphis City School District, and Shelby County School District. Special thanks to Partners in Education and Shelby County Schools Educational Foundation for their commitment and support.

Shelby County Commission

Marilyn Loeffel George S. Flinn, Jr.

John Willingham Walter Bailey, Jr.

Julian Bolton Deirdre Malone

Joe Ford Michael Hooks

Cleo Kirk Joyce Avery David Lillard Tom Moss

Bruce Thompson

Needs Assessment Committee Scott Fleming, Chairman

Nick Clark, Vice-Chairman Cato Johnson, Vice-Chairman

Nisha Powers, Secretary Dr. Tom Glass Aubrey Howard

David Lillard, Commissioner Deidre Malone, Commissioner

David Pickler, Shelby County Schools Wanda M. Halbert, Memphis City Schools

Jay Weatherington

Memphis City Schools Board of Commissioners

Dr. Carol Johnson, Superintendent Wanda M. Halbert, President Sara L. Lewis, Vice President

Stephanie Gatewood Deni C. Hirsch

Patrice Jordan-Robinson Michael Hooks, Jr.

Dr. Jeff Warren Carl Johnson, Sr. Tomeka R. Hart

Shelby County Schools

Board of Education Dr. Bobby Webb, Superintendent

David Pickler, Chairman Wyatt Bunker, Vice Chairman

Virginia Harvell Ron Lollar

Anne Edmiston Joseph Clayton Ernest Chism

Preliminary Report 1 06/16/2005 DeJONG JAED


PREVIOUS REPORTS & PLANNING ACTIVITIES An analysis and review of the following reports and activities was conducted to ascertain the nature an extent of factors that contribute to capital funding requests. In addition, discussions were held with the Needs Assessment Committee and both Memphis City School and Shelby County School personnel in order to enhance, amplify, and explain the reports and activities so that their observations and experiences could be incorporated as a valuable learning tool for future reference.

Capital Needs Report Memphis City Schools December 1, 2004

Annual Capital Request Needs Report

Shelby County Schools December 1, 2004

Addendum to Annual Capital Request Needs Report Shelby County Schools March 8, 2005

Comparison of MCS & SCS Space Programs EFS March 8, 2005

Best Practices Data, Comparative Analysis EFS & Dr. Tom Glass NAC endorsed spaced standards March 8, 2005

School Capacity Analysis 2003-2004 Memphis & Shelby County Division of Planning and Development August 4, 2004

Memphis City Schools Physical Needs Assessment EFS July 1, 2004

Memphis City Schools Design Manual EFS January 24, 2005



There are multiple variables to develop uniform guidelines and establish equitable, on-going methods of professionally identifying the short-term and long-term needs and capital expenditures of two separate school districts. A work shop was conducted at their April 5, 2005 NAC meeting. A questionnaire focused on guidelines and priorities was used as an impetus to obtain input and build consensus around key planning issues. Individual and group results with comments are included in the Appendix of this report. A plan, to be successful, needs to have a life beyond the tenure of the individual administrator. This requires collaboration and a collective buy-in to development of the plan, and of the final plan itself. We would like to thank the following participants for their time and effort in the Needs Assessment Committee work shop.

Scott Fleming Aubrey J. Howard Jimmie Tucker Maura Sullivan Tom Marshall Deni C. Hirsch Jay Weatherington Richard Holden

David Lillard Dr. Susan Roakes

Kevin Gallagher Patrice J. Robinson

Dr. Jeff Warren Cato Johnson

John N. Avis Judy Ostner

Nick Clark Floria Todd Dr. Bobby Webb Dr. Tom Glass Ethele S. Hilliard Alexander Sasfras



TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements 1

Executive Summary 5

Square Foot per Student Recommendations 11

Elementary Schools 12

Middle Schools 14

High Schools 16

Cost per Square Foot Recommendations 20

National Data 20

District Comparison 21

Application of Recommendations 26

Capital Needs 27

APPENDIX

Best Practices A -1

District Prototypes A -8

Elementary Schools A-8

Middle Schools A-10

High Schools A-13

School Construction Cost Data A-18

Systems/Materials Comparison A-23

Prevailing Wages A-25

Individual & Group Questionnaire Results A-26



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Based on a request from the Needs Assessment Committee of Memphis and Shelby County, the services of DeJONG, an educational planning firm, and JAED Facilities were obtained in order to meet their mission. This encompasses developing uniform guidelines with respect to capital expenditures and establishing an equitable, on-going method of professionally identifying the short and long term needs of Shelby County Schools and Memphis City Schools. Part 1 of these services included a preliminary report with recommendations for square foot per student and cost per square foot at the elementary, middle and high school levels. Findings were as follows. Square Foot per Student A major component of facility needs is having adequate space to support the educational program. Spaces were determined by curriculum, provided by both Shelby County Schools and Memphis City Schools in the form of a prototypical program [see Appendix, Page A-8] used by the districts for new construction and the class sizes required by the State of Tennessee. The Tennessee General Assembly, believing that smaller classes increase students’ chances of academic success, included class size standards in the Education Improvement Act [EIA] of 1992 that required lower class sizes for all grades by the school year 2001-02. The standards are indicated below.

Grades K-3 20 students average 25 maximum Grade 4-6 25 students average 30 maximum Grades 7-12 30 students average 35 maximum

Types of spaces indicated in the prototypical programs included course areas such as classrooms, science labs, art and music, computer labs, cafeteria, gymnasium, media centers, and career and technical education. Size of spaces was based on the number of students to be accommodated and program pedagogy. For example, in a classroom, students may be engaged in lecture, project learning, small group interaction, and individualized education. At times the instruction will be teacher-directed; at other times, it may involve students working with technology. Comparisons were made of both districts’ prototypes and square footages were revised reflecting “best practices” throughout the United States. DeJONG has a vast amount of experience regarding Educational Design Manuals and Facility Standards and has completed more Program and Design Requirements than any other educational planning firm in the country. Such experience includes the District of Columbia Public Schools Standardized Design Guidelines, The Ohio School Design Manual, and the proposed Arkansas Educational Facilities Manual. Based on this experience, the following square foot per student recommendations incorporate the “best practices” in educational facility planning today and are located at the top of the next page. Please refer to the Appendix of this report, page A-1, for resources and additional reference material regarding “best practices” and recommended standards. The current district programs differ to some degree depending upon the specific program allocation.



900 square foot regular classrooms 1,000 square foot Kindergarten classrooms Cafeteriums/Auditerias at the middle school level Average circulation factor [corridors, mechanical, etc.] of 35%

There is a significant difference in the amount of space required based on size of enrollment and type of school. The lower the enrollment, the more square footage per student is required. This may result, for example, when a regulation gym is required to be a certain size regardless of the enrollment of the school. The same size gym for more students results in more efficiency of space. The following table recommends square foot per student based on school enrollment goals derived from the Memphis and Shelby County prototypical programs.

Elementary Middle High Enrollment SF/Student Enrollment SF/Student Enrollment SF/Student

750 120 900 130 800 175 1000 115 1000 125 1200 160

1200 115 2000 150 The above square foot requirements attempt to encompass the educational programs of both school districts. However, a significant difference is that of the auditorium required by Memphis City Schools at the middle school level. The school districts may provide an educational and/or cost benefit evaluation for spaces which may go above and beyond those included in this report or are required as part of their respective board policy. Cost per Square Foot There are dozens of variables that affect the cost of construction. They vary in degree, in the ability to be quantified, and the potential effect they may have on a project. The objective is to establish a baseline cost per square foot to be constructed under the current funding mechanisms. In order to determine a baseline cost, a side by side list of construction standards from both districts was developed in order to analyze the points of divergence that cause the cost variance. The largest of these was the Memphis City Schools standard for Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning [HVAC] which accounts for nearly 2/3 of the current construction costs difference. Our understanding is that this specification is under review but not finalized; therefore, we have to use the specification that was last used. A mandatory wage rate and benefits package, commonly called Prevailing Wage, is required by Memphis City government for all city funded projects within the city. The Memphis City Schools has adopted this policy as well. The Shelby County government and the Shelby County School system do not have a Prevailing Wage requirement. Since this committee is a recommending body to the Shelby County Government, it will follow the standard of there not being a Prevailing Wage requirement. Experience has shown that this can result in an additional cost factor as high as 15% for applying these factors to construction costs. Please refer to the Appendix, page A-25, for more details regarding Prevailing Wages.



Because of the many variables involved, the following construction cost per square foot guidelines are recommended.

Grade Level Cost per Square FootElementary $97 - $107

Middle School $99 - $109 High School $122 - $134

The above costs include construction costs and standard site development only. Land acquisition and development of athletic facilities are not included. Furthermore, the school districts may provide a cost benefit evaluation for building components which may go above and beyond those included in this report or are required as part of their respective board policy.



CAPITAL NEEDS As part of the Needs Assessment Committee meeting in April, a questionnaire focused on capital planning was used as an impetus to obtain input and build consensus regarding the varying district priorities. The following summarizes results from both individual and group questionnaires. Please refer to the Appendix of this report, page A-26, for all tabulations and comments.

Participants indicated that there should not be a common set of priorities for both Memphis City Schools and Shelby County Schools.

Those that ranked categories for Memphis City Schools most often ranked Immediate Needs [emergency projects to maintain a “safe, dry, & healthy” environment] as the highest priority. The next priorities were fairly evenly ranked between Building Renovations, Building Replacements, and School Closures & Mergers. Clearly Growth was indicated as the lowest priority in Memphis City Schools.

Those that ranked categories for Shelby County Schools most often ranked Growth [includes new construction and additions] as the highest priority. This was followed by Immediate Needs, Building Renovations, Building Replacement, and School Closures & Mergers respectfully.

Participants indicated that all categories should be funded, however it was unclear how this might be accomplished.

Most participants estimated that between $500 million and $1.0 billion would be necessary over multiple years, perhaps 3-5 years, to address the school facility needs in MCS and SCS.

It is not surprising that the priorities for each district are different. This is a result of two primary factors, average age of infrastructure and demographics. Memphis City Schools maintains older facilities and is therefore concerned with immediate needs and renovations. Shelby County Schools has had large influxes of population and housing development and is therefore concerned with providing enough space to support a growing student population. The chart on the following page combines the capital funding requests from both districts and provides an annual sub-total. ADA compliance and deferred maintenance have been allocated over three years per their proposed phasing; also, environmental condition improvements were dispersed.



Project District Completion Date

Funding Requested

New SE HS SCS 2006 [2008] $50,000,000New SE MS SCS 2006 [2007] $12,000,000New SE Elem SCS 2006 [2007] $12,000,000Chimneyrock Roof SCS 2005 $1,000,000ADA compl, Group 1 MCS 2006 $27,497,000Defered Maint, Group 1 MCS 2006 $51,540,000Enviro Cond Improv MCS 2006 $33,200,000Demo abandoned MCS 2005 $1,200,000Demo merged MCS 2005 $2,200,000Rivercrest ES addn SCS 2007 $2,000,000New ES E Cordova SCS 2007 $12,000,000New MS SW Collierville SCS 2007 $12,000,000New S Cordova ES MCS 2007 $15,000,000New Countrywood MS MCS 2007 $25,000,000Treadwell HS renov MCS 2007 $10,084,000Trezevant HS renov MCS 2007 $16,069,000W Station HS renov MCS 2007 $19,045,000Sub-Total $301,835,000

Collierville MS renov SCS 2008 $6,000,000Elmore Park Replacement SCS 2008 $12,000,000Shadowtown MS renov SCS 2008 $6,000,000ADA compl, Group 2 MCS 2007 $8,013,000Defered Maint, Group 2 MCS 2007 $41,200,000Enviro Cond Improv MCS 2007 $33,200,000Sub-Total $106,413,000

New MS NE Bartlett SCS 2009 $12,000,000New ES Arlington/Lake SCS 2009 $12,000,000Farmington revov SCS 2009 $3,000,000Dogwood renov SCS 2009 $3,000,000Germantown ES renov SCS 2009 $4,000,000New HS S Collierville SCS 2010 $50,000,000ADA compl, Group 3 MCS 2008 $5,100,000Defered Maint, Group 3 MCS 2008 $17,500,000Enviro Cond Improv MCS 2008 $33,200,000Sub-Total $139,800,000

New MS Arlington/Lake SCS 2010 $12,000,000Harold ES Addn/renov SCS 2010 $6,000,000Sub-Total $18,000,000TOTAL $566,048,000



CONCLUSION In order to assist the Shelby County Government, it is recommended that the Capital Needs presented by the Shelby County Schools and Memphis City Schools be reviewed for funding on an annual basis. The funding requests presented in this document are based on best assumptions for short-term and long-term facility needs, but as variables change, facility needs may need to be re-evaluated. The challenges facing Shelby County include renovating and replacing an aging school facility inventory, as well as keeping up with new construction in order to accommodate a growing student population. By adopting some of the future planning recommendations and suggestions brought forth by the NAC members, a process that helps the County and both school districts be proactive in the long-range management of their facilities can be developed. This will result in achieving the ultimate goal of creating attractive and equitable environments that are conducive to efficient and effective learning, teaching, and community activities. The Needs Assessment Committee submits this report as a preliminary response to the charges set forth by the Resolution as adopted by the Board of County Commissioners and County Mayor A C Wharton, Jr. Looking toward 2006 and beyond, it is recommended that further study and analysis be conducted to include, but not limited to, demographics, construction costs, and life cycle costs.



SQUARE FOOT PER STUDENT RECOMMENDATIONS INTRODUCTION During the past thirty years, the programs in a public school system and the manner in which they are delivered have changed significantly. Repeated arguments are heard that “this school was able to accommodate 600 students thirty years ago and now you are saying it can only accommodate 400 students today. How can this be the case?” Persons making these statements often do not realize that the maximum class size has been reduced for example, from 30 to 25, the music program was being held on the stage, there was no art room and the teacher used a cart, computers had not been invented and there were no computer labs, the Kindergarten program went from half day to full day and severely handicapped special education students that were previously institutionalized are now attending public schools. In addition, many states are legislating a class size of 20 or under for the early elementary grades, schools are expanding pre-school services, and there are many more at-risk student programs. Historically, school districts throughout North America have determined the capacity of school by counting the number of classrooms in a building and multiplying by an average class size. In facility planning terminology, the term, “design capacity” is used to describe this methodology. Even though at first glance this seems only to be common sense, this methodology does not take into account the programmatic implications of school facilities. In an elementary school there is a need for libraries/media centers, administrative areas, special education classrooms, and specialized spaces for specific program areas such as science, art and music. In a secondary school, in theory it may be possible to use every classroom every period of every day, but from a practical perspective it is not likely. In the facility planning industry, taking program issues into consideration is called “functional capacity”. Even though functional capacity is a more realistic analysis of what a building can accommodate, it is necessary to apply some common sense. In existing buildings, there are examples in which classrooms have been taken over for other purposes such as teacher prep areas, storage, or offices which can result in a lower capacity figure. Public schools sometimes use space in school buildings for special purposes such as community activities or district-wide special education programs when space is available in a building. The location of this type of “non-prototypical” program impacts the space necessary to accommodate the “prototypical” programs. For planning purposes, the square footage per student assumes these special purpose programs could be moved to another location. Therefore, square footage per student is defined as the gross square footage of the building divided by number of students the building can accommodate assuming a “traditional” or “prototypical” educational program. The criteria used for determining the gross square footage of each building and the capacity of each facility, should reflect the programs of the public schools yet should be kept simple for planning purposes. The criteria for determining total square footage per building and capacity is different for elementary, middle and high schools. In general, the methodology is to determine the design capacity and apply a utilization rate [i.e. the percentage of time a teaching station can be kept in use during the day] to yield the



functional capacity. For buildings built under educational programs prior to several decades ago, it is not uncommon for the functional capacity to be much lower than the design capacity given the changing needs of the educational program. Overall, a typical methodology would be to start with one program of requirements rather than comparing two different programs. Some generalizations were made to both prototypes in order to categorize spaces for a logical comparison. For example, teacher work stations were named and categorized within the classroom sections of the Memphis City School prototype, while they were categorized separately within the Shelby County School prototype. The square footage of these spaces was not changed, but moved into the same category for the purposes of this report. Finally, constructing a building includes more than classrooms, gymnasiums, and program spaces. A building also includes circulation spaces and construction factors such as wall thickness. A circulation factor is added to account for hallways, locker areas, vestibules, etc. MCS and SCS have differing circulation factors. In addition, SCS includes some items within a category entitles Building Services that MCS includes within the circulation factor. Again, some generalizations were made to both prototypes in order to categorize spaces for a logical comparison. Furthermore, if the building services square footage was added to the circulation square footage within the SCS prototype, the circulation factors would be within a closer range. ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS The following factors need to be incorporated into the determination of square footage per student at the elementary level. Average Class Size Even though a class size of 25 is the most common number used by school districts throughout the United States many states and local districts are moving toward smaller class sizes for the early elementary [primary] grades. Both Memphis City Schools and Shelby County Schools have based their prototypes on the state required average of 20 students for grades K-3 and average of 25 students for grades 4-6. Both districts embrace the K-5, 6-8, 9-12 grade configuration, however, both districts maintain varying configurations within their facility inventory, usually as a result of building or site constraints. To determine square foot per student, the state class sizes were utilized. Special Education Special Education instruction occurs at various levels of need, varying class sizes, and in various locations throughout a district. Instructional areas for high incident students [learning disabled, behaviorally and mildly mentally handicapped, etc.] are usually found at the elementary level. For planning purposes, and to reflect both district prototypes, the square footage requirement assumes that low incident students [severely profoundly handicapped] are not located in the building and are being housed at a different district facility.



For discussion purposes, however, assume that a building can accommodate 400 students with no low incident or severely profoundly handicapped students. If the student population was to change, and the same school identified four classrooms dedicated to serving this population, the capacity should be reduced to 300 students, and therefore more square footage per student will be necessary. It is suggested, for buildings that house low incident or severely profoundly handicapped students, that two figures for square footage be established: one calculation including this population and one not including this population. The reason being that if the building is not to be used for this purpose in the future, it has the potential for housing more students. Art and Music Spaces In nearly every elementary school in North America, art and music instruction is an important part of a well-rounded elementary curriculum. Therefore, spaces for each of these programs should be included in an elementary school. In schools with fewer students, these programs may need to be combined into one space. Computer Labs Even though the future solution is to have computers integrated into all instructional spaces, the current practice in both MCS and SCS is to have at least one designated computer lab in an elementary school. Science Classrooms State proficiency testing has placed an increased emphasis on science curriculum at the elementary level. Currently, science instruction is limited to what can be done in the regular classroom. Districts will need to decide whether to provide separate classrooms for science or to include it in the regular classroom. Special Programs Most school districts provide special programs for at-risk students such as Title I and other programs for gifted students. If these programs are to be provided, space needs to be allocated for these purposes. ELEMENTARY PROTOTYPE COMPARISON The table on the following page compares the Memphis City Schools and the Shelby County Schools Elementary Prototypical program spaces. Of all the grade levels, these two prototypes are the closest in terms of square foot per student. Some of the variables include:

Size of Kindergarten Classrooms: MCS = 940 SF, SCS = 850 SF Shelby County Schools includes a full-size gymnasium. Memphis City Schools includes a larger media center for a smaller population.



Memphis City Shelby County

PROGRAM AREA 750 1,000CLASSROOMS 33,250 45,000OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL SPACES 4,550 7,320PHYSICAL EDUCATION 4,450 8,450STAGE/PLATFORM 800 820FOOD SERVICES 6,700 7,200MEDIA CENTER 3,700 3,300ADMINISTRATION 3,950 5,611STUDENT SERVICES 1,790 0BUILDING SERVICES In 40% Factor 7,880

Subtotal 59,190 85,581Memphis City - 40% Factor 23,676Shelby County - 25% Factor 21,395

TOTAL 82,866 106,976SF Per Student 110 107

MIDDLE SCHOOLS Twenty and thirty years ago, middle schools were called junior high schools and were “mini” high schools. This was followed by a trend toward middle schools that currently makes up most of the United States today. Currently, there is a movement in many school districts to eliminate middle schools and increase the number of elementary schools that continue through the eighth grade. Both Memphis City Schools and Shelby County Schools embrace the middle school concept, although there are some variations in grade configuration incorporated by both. The middle school philosophy places students in teams. The size of teams varies from school to school. A team may be two teachers and 50 students or teams may be as large as 6-8 teachers and 150-200 students. Regardless of the size of the team, the program typically consists of a core curriculum [English/language arts, math, science and social studies] and an exploratory curriculum of physical education, art, music, band, computers, technology, and foreign language. There maybe other exploratory areas as well, depending on the individual middle school. Students usually attend the core curricular areas every day throughout the school year. There are a wide variety of schedules associated with the exploratory programs. Students may attend an exploratory program every day for 6-18 weeks and then move on to another exploratory program or they may attend exploratory programs on alternating days. There are as many different schedules as there are middle schools and you need to be a middle school student to figure it out.



For schools that operate as middle schools, a modification of the elementary school method for determining square footage applies. The state mandated class size of 25 for grade 6 and 30 for grades 7-8 was used to determine a recommended square foot per student. A school may have 30 classrooms for core curricular programs. This school may also have exploratory classrooms [art, band, choral, computer, technology, life skills, and physical education] and special education classrooms. The square footage of the building would be determined by the specific programs offered by the local school districts. Evaluation of the results of those educational program decisions on the use of square footage is best done on a value added basis where the specific needs of each element of the program is assigned the resulting square footage requirement. At that point the local requirement of area can be compared to comparable program elements used elsewhere for purposes of benchmarking the allocation of footage. Ultimately the educational program of each district is determined by the respective school boards and the scope of this committee is evaluating the impact on square footage of area. MIDDLE SCHOOL PROTOTYPE COMPARISON The following table compares the Memphis City Schools and the Shelby County Schools Middle School Prototypes. There is less contrast between the MCS 1,200 student middle school and the SCS 1,000 student middle school based on square foot per student. However, a major difference with both Memphis prototypes is the inclusion of an auditorium.

Memphis City Memphis City Shelby CountyPROGRAM AREA 900 1,200 1,000CLASSROOMS 20,950 24,150 33,000OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL SPACES 24,170 26,520 14,164PHYSICAL EDUCATION 15,250 13,450 10,280AUDITORIUM / PLATFORM 9,750 12,000 836FOOD SERVICES 8,750 8,750 7,200MEDIA CENTER 4,125 4,125 3,600ADMINISTRATION 4,380 4,380 3,405STUDENT SERVICES 1,960 1,960 0BUILDING SERVICES 1,258 1,258 5,810

Subtotal 90,593 96,593 78,295Memphis City - 43% Factor 38,955 41,535Shelby County - 28% Factor 21,923

TOTAL 129,548 138,128 100,218SF Per Student 144 115 100



HIGH SCHOOLS High schools operate on a totally different basis than elementary schools. Students are not in self-contained environments occasionally traveling to another location for a special class. At the high school level, students typically change classes each period. High schools are undergoing significant change in program delivery. Many schools are adopting block scheduling and/or various teaming approaches. The method for calculating the square feet per student at the high school level needs to be flexible to deliver a traditional departmentalized program or the newer evolving methods of program delivery. Average Class Size There is currently a wide range of class sizes in a high school and from school to school. It is not uncommon to find some very small classes in advanced placement courses and upper level foreign languages. At the same time, it is not uncommon to find 60 or more students in a band or choir class. Several states have attempted to determine the capacity of a building by establishing a capacity for each type of room in a building. This may be appropriate, but often results in a much larger capacity than what is realistic. For example, the band room may be rated as a capacity for 75 students. The fact is that the full band only meets one period per day. The rest of the day, the room is being used for smaller sectional or specialized bands such as a jazz band. To say that the capacity of the band room is 75 assumes that the room is used every period of the day for that number of students. In reality, the band room may be used for 75 students one period per day and less than 20 students each of the remaining periods, or the room may only be used as a band room 3-4 periods per day. Even though this seems like an over simplification, using an average class size of 30 students across the board has worked quite well in determining capacity at the high school level. Teaching Stations/Classrooms Teaching stations are defined as areas in which students receive instruction in core curriculum courses as well as exploratory/elective curriculum areas. These areas should be adequately sized to meet the needs of the programs included in the space. Program areas include English, math, social studies, foreign language, science, art, music, family and consumer science, business, vocational/technology education, and physical education. In a high school the gym should be counted as one or more teaching stations. Even though it is not a regular classroom, it is a location in which students receive instruction on a hourly/daily bases. Likewise, when an educational program requires such uses, a food lab, science lab, business computer lab, and vocational/technology lab are all counted as teaching stations. Auditoriums and library/media centers are not counted as teaching stations since these spaces are not assigned for “regular” instruction.



Utilization Factor It is very difficult to schedule every teaching station every period of the day. There may be a specialized space such as a vocational/technical lab for which there is insufficient enrollment to conduct classes each period. At times it is advisable for the classroom to be available to the teacher during a teachers prep period. At other times it is just not possible to maintain an average enrollment of 25 students and there needs to be some room to adjust. It is recommended that the utilization factor of 85% be used at the high school level. This would represent approximate utilization of five out six periods in a six period day or six out of seven periods in a seven period day. This may indicate that some spaces are being used more than 85% of the time whereas others may be used less. Block scheduling provides another dilemma. There are a variety of block schedules but many are based on a four 90-minute period day. Some of the time it is the same four periods every day. At other times, it is four periods on alternating days. Arguments have been made to reduce the utilization to 75% which would represent three out of four periods per day. On the surface, 75% may seem logical but it is not efficient use of space. This would mean that 25% of classroom space would be idle at any one time. Using the 85% factor in a school which utilizes a block schedule would mean that a room would be available one period every other day on the alternating block schedule. Or, that approximately half of the rooms would be utilized 100% and the other half would be utilized 75% on the schools which have the same four periods every day. Experience has shown that if the 85% factor is used for planning purposes, the high school has the ability to increase the utilization to 90% or higher in the event of short-term overcrowding issues. Experience will also show that once a building surpasses 90% utilization, scheduling of spaces and students becomes increasingly difficult. [Authors’ note: if space is going to be used less than 50% of the time, consideration should be given to reusing the space for another purpose or determining some type of multi-use of the space to increase its utilization.] In the past, high school capacity was determined by counting the number of teaching stations in a facility and multiplying by an average class size. In facility planning terminology this is called the “design capacity” of the building. However, this methodology does not take into account programmatic implications. By applying the utilization factor to the design capacity, the functional capacity can be obtained and finally the square foot per student. An example is included below. # of Teaching Stations 40 Average # of Students X30 X 85% = 1020 Capacity



HIGH SCHOOL PROTOTYPE COMPARISON The following table compares the Memphis City Schools and the Shelby County Schools High School Prototypes. Again, there is less contrast between the larger MCS prototype the SCS high school based on square foot per student. This time, while all three prototypes include an auditorium, Memphis City Schools provides a larger auditorium in relation to the size of student population. In addition, the circulation factors for all three grade levels differ between the two districts.

Memphis City Memphis City Shelby CountyPROGRAM AREA 800 1,200 2,000CLASSROOMS 33,340 44,240 83,906CAREER & TECHNICAL EDUCATION 12,250 12,250 17,900SPECIAL EDUCATION 1,850 1,850 4,800OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL SPACES 3,500 3,800 4,000PHYSICAL EDUCATION 16,900 21,100 30,980AUDITORIUM 11,950 13,450 11,510FOOD SERVICES 7,710 8,750 11,670MEDIA CENTER 4,350 5,925 8,000ADMINISTRATION 5,150 5,780 8,570STUDENT SERVICES 2,545 2,655 3,910BUILDING SERVICES 1,458 1,670 14,200

Subtotal 101,003 121,470 199,446Memphis City - 43% Factor 43,431 52,232Shelby County - 30% Factor 59,834

TOTAL 144,434 173,702 259,280SF Per Student 181 145 130



CONCLUSION To determine square foot per student for comprehensive elementary, middle, and high schools, the space requirements must be based on curriculum and class size guidelines. Therefore, Based on comparisons of the Memphis City Schools and the Shelby County Schools program of requirements and application of best practices in facility planning, the following square foot per student guidelines are recommended. The guidelines attempt to encompass the educational programs of both school districts. However, a significant difference is that of the auditorium required by Memphis City Schools at the middle school level. The school districts may provide an educational and/or cost benefit evaluation for spaces which may go above and beyond those included in this report or are required as part of their respective board policy.

Elementary Middle High Enrollment SF/Student Enrollment SF/Student Enrollment SF/Student

750 120 900 130 800 175 1000 115 1000 125 1200 160

1200 115 2000 150 The reason smaller schools require more square foot per student is a result of space efficiencies. Although the sizes of core spaces, such as media centers and cafeterias are reduced, they are still necessary spaces. There may be alternative ways to lower the square feet per student in smaller schools. Reducing the number of special program areas or incorporating different educational pedagogies like multi-age, grouping, and project based learning rather than subject-based learning, could create more efficiency of space.



COST PER SQUARE FOOT RECOMMENDATIONS

INTRODUCTION Comparing cost per square foot of different school projects is never an exact science because of the many variables involved. These variables can be as diverse as the size of the buildings being compared, the types of materials and systems included, and the labor climate in which the construction takes place. It is equally difficult to establish a single, standard cost per square foot that is to be used for the funding of school projects. The challenge of establishing cost guidelines was approached from two directions to determine baselines and common ground. The first approach established a relative cost per square foot based on a compilation of national data. The second approach examined the standards of the Memphis City School District and the Shelby County School District to determine commonalities and differences. This allowed comparison of the projects of each district and established a way to analyze the differences in costs. The findings of both approaches determined recommended cost per square foot guidelines. NATIONAL DATA A nationally recognized source of data for construction costs is maintained and published by the R. S. Means Company. The 2005 edition of their published data was used to compile this report. The data is collected on thousands of projects from across the United States and Canada and is compiled by building use types [i.e. schools are not compared with office buildings or factories.] Because the data includes a large number of projects from a wide geographic area it incorporates buildings of many construction types and materials, and a great variance in size from small to very large. Site purchase costs, design fees, and project management fees are excluded from all calculations. The project construction costs are further divided for the 25th percentile of projects which generally does not include site development work or equipment. The 50th percentile projects generally include equipment but not site work and the 75th percentile projects generally include both equipment and site development work. The result is a broad based, cross section of costs that is recognized as a standard. The 75th percentile figure was used for this report because it more closely reflects the information available from both school districts. The national standards are as follows.

Elementary School $120 per square foot Middle School $120 per square foot High School $136 per square foot

Data is also compiled for material and labor costs by local regions. Adjustment factors are established from this information for modifying the broad based cost to customize it to a specific region. The factor for Memphis is 87.8% [96.6 % for material & 77.2 % for installation], which is the highest in a larger region [approx. 150 mile radius] surrounding the city and is the highest in Tennessee with Nashville at 87.1% [98.0% for material & 74.0% for installation.] The following table compares regional costs from nearby locations.



Region Cost Factor

Jackson, Tennessee 78.0% [98.5% for material & 53.3% for installation] McKenzie, Tennessee 75.3% [96.5% for material & 49.7% for installation] West Memphis, Arkansas 76.9% [95.1% for material & 55.0% for installation] Jonesboro, Arkansas 77.1% [95.5% for material & 55.0% for installation] Little Rock, Arkansas 81.2% [95.2% for material & 64.3% for installation]

Tupelo, Mississippi 70.6% [97.4% for material & 38.4% for installation] Greenwood, Mississippi 68.7% [97.3% for material & 34.3% for installation] Source: RS Means

An additional factor that can be derived from this data is from a comparison of the material cost and installation or labor cost for each of the cities within the region. The material costs are similar across the region with less than a 2% variance. It is the labor portion of the equation that has the largest impact, and is the primary variable for the Memphis area cost. When this factor is applied the following standards can be established for the Memphis region.

Elementary $120 / sf x 87.8% = $105.36 Middle School $120 / sf x 87.8% = $105.36 High School $136 / sf x 87.8% = $119.41

This first method of study establishes a base to be used for comparison. Its biggest weakness is that it applies to the entire Memphis area without a way to compare the cost variances between Shelby County and Memphis City. DISTRICT COMPARISONS Determining a cost per square foot for school construction to be applied to two adjacent school systems with different circumstances and standards is akin to identifying a common flavor in a bowl of fruit salad. To approach this task a level playing field was attempted for analysis and then the points of divergence were identified that caused the cost variance between work in the two districts. The first step was to prepare a side by side list of the standards applied by each district to the many components of a construction project. The purpose was to establish items that are similar or identical versus those that are different. The similar items will not cause a cost variance and can be ignored while the differences must be examined as the likely cause. The following table compares systems and materials utilized by both districts for new construction. A further detailed analysis is available in the Appendix of this report beginning on page A-22.



System/Material Memphis City Schools Shelby County Schools

Site Similar Similar Exterior Similar masonry construction Similar masonry construction

Exterior doors Require security system on selected doors with card reader, CCTV to office and remote release

Similar materials

Windows Similar materials, require security screens

Similar materials

Roof Preference for pitched roofs with metal covering

Specifies a low slope built-up roof

Roof drainage Similar Similar

Interior Const Similar materials, contractor supplies and installs

Similar materials, purchases the carpet and contractor installs

Interior Doors Specifies solid wood with a plastic laminate face and hollow metal frames.

Specifies painted hollow metal doors and frames.

HVAC

Specifies heating and cooling fan coil units above the ceiling of each room that are connected to a central plant via a 4 pipe system; this has recently been changed to a 2 pipe system. The central plant consists of a boiler and a chiller. Fresh air is ducted to the room units from a central heat recovery unit

Specifies self contained gas fired rooftop heating & cooling units per room and has recently changed their design to include a central supply for tempered outdoor air for each wing

HVAC Controls Building wide energy management system; complete system specified

Building wide energy management system; buys the components for installation by the contractor

Electrical system Similar Similar, slightly higher cost to

connect the individual, self contained HVAC units

Lighting Similar Similar

Intercom Similar, requires a complete system Similar, contractor installs empty

conduit for a system installed by the district



System/Material Memphis City Schools Shelby County Schools

Telephone Similar Similar TV distribution Similar Similar Sound systems Similar, requires as part of contract Similar, supplies separately Gym Scoreboards

Similar, requires two as part of contract

Similar, supplies separately

Computer network [data wiring & equipment]

Similar, requires as part of contract Similar, supplies separately

Isolated ground system [power to computers]

Required as part of contract Not required or installed

Window treatment

Requires mini blinds as part of contract

Supplies separately

Lockers [student & athletic]


Folding bleachers

Similar, requires as part of contract, quantity required is greater

Similar, supplies separately

Food service equipment

Similar Similar

Science Lab equipment


Library equipment


OBSERVATIONS Shelby County Schools supplies many items directly to the project and are therefore not included in the contractors cost while the same items are provided by the contractor on Memphis City Schools projects and included in the bid cost. These costs must be added into the project to allow for comparison. A second observation is that Memphis City Schools has established several standards that are more costly than Shelby County and have the major impact on the cost variance. The largest of these is the differences in environmental system design [Heating Ventilating and Air Conditioning]. The standard in Shelby County is a self contained roof mounted package unit per room while the standard in Memphis City is a more traditional central system with units above the ceiling of each room piped to a central plant for heated and chilled water and ducted to a central heat recovery fresh air supply. This accounts for nearly 60% of the current construction cost difference based upon the 2004 environmental design standard.



Additional variations include roofing systems, security systems, and computer power supply systems. The preferred roofing system of Memphis City is a sloped, standing seam metal roof system versus the Shelby County standard of a low slope, built-up modified bituminous system. There is a series of security related issues that are standard in Memphis City Schools but not included in Shelby County Schools. These consist of security/safety screens on all windows, and entrance doors observed by CCTV cameras and magnetic locks controlled from a remote location. Finally, there is a more complex power supply system for the computers in the Memphis City system that is not specified for Shelby County. This is comprised of a separate power grid of room outlets, distribution panels with isolated grounds and a power source through a special transformer. After the material/system variables were determined, a cost comparison was established. A standard sized building for each grade grouping was created by determining the average of the square footage allowed by each district for that building type [resolution of the differences in square footage is addressed previously in this report]. These averages were then multiplied by the target enrollment by school type that has been established by each district. This was used primarily to calculate cost per square foot factors for items that are typically stated as unit prices. The costs published by Shelby County [$85/sf for elementary and middle schools, and $110/sf for high school] were used as a base to establish cost differentials. To this base, costs for identified items as required to establish a cost per square foot that reflected the entire project for each system was added. This included items identified in the base contract by one system and purchased separately by the other to “level the playing field,” as well as the incrementally higher costs for standards established by Memphis City. The totals for each school type [grade alignment] established the relative base costs for each system before considering the impact of mandatory wage rates and benefit packages. Neither the wage rates nor the benefits package is required by Shelby County A mandatory wage rate and benefits package, commonly called Prevailing Wage, is required by Memphis City government for all city funded projects within the city. The Memphis City Schools has adopted this policy as well. Experience has shown an additional cost factor as high as 15% for applying these factors to construction costs. The 11% factor determined in a study by the University of Memphis was used for this study. Following is the resulting cost per square foot comparison.

Shelby County Memphis Memphis [Before wage rates] [with wage rates] Elementary $91 $106 $118 Middle School $94 $108 $122 High School $117 $132 $148

To analyze this, the elementary school cost difference of $14.90 per square foot before the impact of wage rates was considered. This cost difference is from the revised base cost for the Shelby County elementary school prototype of $91 per square foot to include the items supplied to the project separate from the contractors’ costs.



PrelimiDeJONG

nary Report 25 06/16/2005 JAED

The HVAC system added $ 9.00 The Roof system added $ 4.00 Security provisions added $ 1.30 Technology power added $ .60 Difference in “Standards” cost $14.90 The comparisons for the other school types are similar and show that even if the design standards were to be made the same, a similar building would probably cost more in the City of Memphis than it would in Shelby County due to the impact of prevailing wage rates. Furthermore, research indicates that prevailing wage rates have a greater impact on renovation projects versus new construction. CONCLUSION A single fixed cost per square foot cannot be established for construction cost because of the many variables involved, not all of which are design decisions. It is recommended that the most equitable solution would be to establish a median construction cost per square foot with an acceptable range as indicated below. Please note the following figures are based on current costs for the 2005 year, application of these numbers in future years should be adjusted on an annual basis.

Grade Level Cost per Square FootElementary $97 - $107

Middle School $99 - $109 High School $122 - $134

The above standards would encompass the total construction cost of Shelby County School projects and require Memphis City School to value engineer out at least half of the current differential by methods of their choosing. Shelby County School would still have the option of purchasing items with separate funds and dropping below the above benchmark, and Memphis City School would have the option of applying separate funds to exceed the benchmark as long as the capital funding stays within the allowance. The above costs include construction costs and standard site development only. Land acquisition and development of athletic facilities are not included. Furthermore, the school districts may provide a cost benefit evaluation for building components which may go above and beyond those included in this report or are required as part of their respective board policy.


nary Report 26 06/16/2005 JAED

APPLICATION OF RECOMMENDED SF/STUDENT & COST/SF of NEW CONSTRUCTION The purpose of the following chart is to illustrate construction costs based on the proposed recommended square foot per student and cost per square foot previously discussed in this report. The new school construction projections submitted by the Memphis City Schools and Shelby County Schools are reflected below. These estimated costs do not include land acquisition or athletic fields.

School Name Type Capacity Prototype Total SF

Recommended SF/Student

Adjusted Total SF

Recommended Const. Cost/SF

Total Const. Cost

SE Unicorporated Area ES 1000 106,976 115 115,000 $102 $11,730,000

SE Area HS HS 2000 259,280 150 300,000 $128 $38,400,000

SE Unicorporated Area MS 1000 100,218 125 125,000 $104 $13,000,000

East Cordova ES 1000 106,976 115 115,000 $102 $11,730,000

SW Collierville MS 1000 100,218 125 125,000 $104 $13,000,000Elmore Park Replacement MS 1000 100,218 125 125,000 $104 $13,000,000

South Cordova ES 750 82,866 120 90,000 $102 $9,180,000

Countrywood-Berryhill MS 900 129,548 130 117,000 $104 $12,168,000

NW Bartlett Area MS 1000 100,218 125 125,000 $104 $13,000,000

Arlington/Lakeland Area ES 1000 106,976 115 115,000 $102 $11,730,000

Arlington/Lakeland Area MS 1000 100,218 125 125,000 $104 $13,000,000

South Collierville Area HS 2000 259,280 150 300,000 $128 $38,400,000

TOTALS 1,552,992 1,777,000 $198,338,000

PrelimiDeJONG


CAPITAL NEEDS As part of the Needs Assessment Committee meeting in April, a questionnaire focused on capital planning was used as an impetus to obtain input and build consensus regarding the varying district priorities. The following summarizes results from both individual and group questionnaires. Please refer to the Appendix of this report, page A-26, for all tabulations and comments.

Participants indicated that there should not be a common set of priorities for both Memphis City Schools and Shelby County Schools.

Those that ranked categories for Memphis City Schools most often ranked Immediate Needs [emergency projects to maintain a “safe, dry, & healthy” environment] as the highest priority. The next priorities were fairly evenly ranked between Building Renovations, Building Replacements, and School Closures & Mergers. Clearly Growth was indicated as the lowest priority in Memphis City Schools.

Those that ranked categories for Shelby County Schools most often ranked Growth [includes new construction and additions] as the highest priority. This was followed by Immediate Needs, Building Renovations, Building Replacement, and School Closures & Mergers respectfully.

Participants indicated that all categories should be funded, however it was unclear how this might be accomplished.

Most participants estimated that between $500 million and $1.0 billion would be necessary over multiple years, perhaps 3-5 years, to address the school facility needs in MCS and SCS.

It is not surprising that the priorities for each district are different. This is a result of two primary factors, average age of infrastructure and demographics. Memphis City Schools maintains older facilities and is therefore concerned with immediate needs and renovations. Shelby County Schools has had large influxes of population and housing development and is therefore concerned with providing enough space to support a growing student population. The chart on the following page combines the capital funding requests from both districts and provides an annual sub-total. ADA compliance and deferred maintenance have been allocated over three years per their proposed phasing; also, environmental condition improvements were dispersed.



Project District Completion Date

Funding Requested

New SE HS SCS 2006 [2008] $50,000,000New SE MS SCS 2006 [2007] $12,000,000New SE Elem SCS 2006 [2007] $12,000,000Chimneyrock Roof SCS 2005 $1,000,000ADA compl, Group 1 MCS 2006 $27,497,000Defered Maint, Group 1 MCS 2006 $51,540,000Enviro Cond Improv MCS 2006 $33,200,000Demo abandoned MCS 2005 $1,200,000Demo merged MCS 2005 $2,200,000Rivercrest ES addn SCS 2007 $2,000,000New ES E Cordova SCS 2007 $12,000,000New MS SW Collierville SCS 2007 $12,000,000New S Cordova ES MCS 2007 $15,000,000New Countrywood MS MCS 2007 $25,000,000Treadwell HS renov MCS 2007 $10,084,000Trezevant HS renov MCS 2007 $16,069,000W Station HS renov MCS 2007 $19,045,000Sub-Total $301,835,000

Collierville MS renov SCS 2008 $6,000,000Elmore Park Replacement SCS 2008 $12,000,000Shadowtown MS renov SCS 2008 $6,000,000ADA compl, Group 2 MCS 2007 $8,013,000Defered Maint, Group 2 MCS 2007 $41,200,000Enviro Cond Improv MCS 2007 $33,200,000Sub-Total $106,413,000

New MS NE Bartlett SCS 2009 $12,000,000New ES Arlington/Lake SCS 2009 $12,000,000Farmington revov SCS 2009 $3,000,000Dogwood renov SCS 2009 $3,000,000Germantown ES renov SCS 2009 $4,000,000New HS S Collierville SCS 2010 $50,000,000ADA compl, Group 3 MCS 2008 $5,100,000Defered Maint, Group 3 MCS 2008 $17,500,000Enviro Cond Improv MCS 2008 $33,200,000Sub-Total $139,800,000

New MS Arlington/Lake SCS 2010 $12,000,000Harold ES Addn/renov SCS 2010 $6,000,000Sub-Total $18,000,000TOTAL $566,048,000



APPENDIX Best Practices Standards for the size of academic classrooms vary from state to state. Some states mandate minimum while others provide recommendations and guidelines. To date, there are not national standards. The following is provided for enhancement of “best practices” included in this report. Kindergarten Classroom: 1,000 SF Commentary: Kindergarten classrooms require space for student desks,

the ability to arrange the furniture in small groups, an area for movement to develop motor skills, space for quiet time, and hands-on activities, frequently in "centers".

References: CEFPI's (Council of Educational Facility Planners

International) 1998 Guide for School Facility Appraisal, page 28, recommends 1,200 square feet as ideal and for a kindergarten classroom to accommodate 20 students, furniture, equipment, and flexible use of space.

Indiana State Board of Education School Facility Guidelines, adopted September 6, 1995, Section Guidelines for Conventional School Facilities, Section 6, states an area of 1,100 square feet for 30 students in a kindergarten classroom.

The Ohio School Facilities Commission’s Ohio School Design Manual, 1999, recommends 1,200 square feet for a kindergarten classroom for 25 students. Kentucky Facility Programming and Construction Criteria, effective date March 2, 1995, states an area of 825 square feet for 20 students in a kindergarten classroom. The North Carolina Public Schools Facilities Guidelines, September 2003, states an area of 1,200 square feet per 20-25 kindergarten students.

Conclusion: The suggested area is 1,000 square feet for a kindergarten classroom based upon an average class size of 20.

Preliminary Report A-1 06/16/2005 DeJONG JAED


Elementary Regular Classroom: 900 SF Commentary: A typical classroom accommodates 20 students, along with

appropriate furniture, equipment, and storage. Elementary instructional methodologies vary from cooperative learning to individualized instruction. Hands-on activities, the need for movement around the room, the use of "centers," integration of technology, and project-based curriculum require flexibility of movement in the room.

Staff developed the following list, which demonstrates the

variety of activities a classroom needs to support:

1. Classroom arrangement should allow for ease of movement without bumping, tripping, etc.

2. Classrooms should accommodate 2-3 adults in a room at the same time.

3. Inclusion/Special Needs students require more space if they are wheelchair bound or need extra teacher attention.

4. Teachers of all grades, K-5, should have the option of student tables or desks. The option of tables requires more space.

5. Cooperative grouping/learning calls for room for student interaction.

6. A common “sharing” area on floor where students sit as a group should be programmed into each classroom.

7. Computer stations need to be where separate groups of students can talk and interact away from the whole group.

8. Hands-on learning [science, math, language arts, social studies, etc.] requires many manipulatives.

9. Storage space in each classroom is needed, especially for manipulatives of subjects mentioned above, books, supplies, etc.

10. Large storage spaces are necessary for large student works-in-progress; many projects are on going over time.

11. Size of children of different ages and space between children in classrooms should be considered in planning a school.

12. Upper elementary grades are starting to be taught with existing teaching methods of kindergarten and primary grades.



References: CEFPI's (Council of Educational Facility Planners International) 1998 Guide for School Facility Appraisal, page 28, recommends 900 square feet as ideal for an elementary classroom.

Indiana State Board of Education School Facility Guidelines, adopted September 7, 1995, Section Guidelines for Conventional School Facilities, Section 7, states an area of 900 square feet for 30 students. The equivalent area for 25 students is 750 square feet. The Ohio School Facilities Commission’s Ohio School Design Manual, 1999, recommends 900 square feet for a classroom for 25 students. Kentucky Facility Programming and Construction Criteria, effective date March 2, 1995, states an area of 800 square feet for 25 students. The North Carolina Public Schools Facilities Guidelines, September 2003, states an area of 1,000 - 1,200 square feet for grades 1-3 and 850 - 1,000 square feet for grades 4-8 classrooms.

Conclusion: The suggested area is 900 square feet for 20-25 students.



Middle School Core Classroom: 900 SF Commentary: A typical classroom accommodates 25 students, along with

appropriate furniture, equipment, and storage. Middle school instructional designs include large-group, small group, and independent activities. Hands-on and interactive activities, research, group problem solving, integration of technology, and project-based learning require flexibility of movement in the room. Additionally, classroom furnishings often include tables rather than individual desks. The adoption of an inclusion model for serving disabled students creates a need for space to accommodate more adults per classroom, wheelchairs, and other assistive devices. The integration of technology creates needs for approximately 150-200 sq. ft. to accommodate 6 to 8 computer stations.


International) 1998 Guide for School Facility Appraisal, page 28 recommends 850 square feet as ideal for a middle school classroom to accommodate 25 students, furniture, equipment, and flexible use of space.

The Ohio School Facilities Commission’s Ohio School Design Manual, 1999, recommends 900 square feet for a classroom for 25 students.

Indiana State Board of Education School Facility Guidelines, adopted September 7, 1995, Section Guidelines for Conventional School Facilities, Section 8, states an area of 900 square feet for 30 students.

Kentucky Facility Programming and Construction Criteria, effective date March 2, 1995, states an area of 750 square feet. The North Carolina Public Schools Facilities Guidelines, September 2003, states an area of 850 - 1,000 square feet for grades 4-8 classrooms.

Conclusion: The suggested area is 900 square feet for 20-25 students.



High School Core Classroom: 900 SF Commentary: A typical classroom accommodates 30 students, along with

appropriate furniture, equipment, and storage. High school instructional designs include large-group, small group, and independent activities. Hands-on and interactive activities, research, group problem solving, integration of technology, and project-based learning require flexibility of movement in the room. Additionally, classroom furnishings often include tables rather than individual desks. The adoption of an inclusion model for serving disabled students creates a need for space to accommodate more adults per classroom, wheelchairs, and other assistive devices. The integration of technology creates needs for approximately 150-200 sq. ft. to accommodate 6 to 8 computer stations.


International) 1998 Guide for School Facility Appraisal, page 28, recommends 800 square feet as ideal for a high school classroom.

The Ohio School Facilities Commission’s Ohio School Design Manual, 1999, recommends 900 square feet for a classroom for 25 students.

Indiana State Board of Education School Facility Guidelines, adopted September 7, 1995, Section Guidelines for Conventional School Facilities, Section 9, states an area of 900 square feet for 30 students.

Kentucky Facility Programming and Construction Criteria, effective date March 2, 1995, states an area of 750 square feet. The North Carolina Public Schools Facilities Guidelines, September 2003, states an area of 750 - 850 square feet for high school classrooms.

Conclusion: The suggested area is 900 square feet for up to 30

students.



Student Dining/ Cafeterioms/Auditerias: 15 SF per student Commentary: The minimum size of 3,000 square feet is based on the

assumption that this space will be used for assembly-type programs. The use of 15 square feet per student is recognized as the area required for tables, chairs, and circulation within the space.

In order for the student dining space to be transformed into

a room for large group presentations, the tables must be removed and stored. Coordination is required with the loose furnishings manufacturer for the “stacked dimensions” of the tables and/or chairs.


International) 1998 Guide for School Facility Appraisal, page 43, recommends 10-14 SF per seated student.

Indiana State Board of Education School Facility Guidelines, adopted September 7, 1995, Section Guidelines for Conventional School Facilities, Section 5, states a multipurpose area for eating shall be provided on the basis of 12 SF per student. An equivalent area for a student capacity of 400 is 1,600 square feet. Kentucky Facility Programming and Construction Criteria, effective date March 2, 1995, states an area of 3,000 square feet for 300 to 599 student capacity.

Conclusion: The suggested amount of space to be allocated for student

dining is 15 SF per seated student.



Building Circulation & Construction: 35% of total space to be allocated for construction and

circulation. Commentary: Constructing a building includes more than classrooms,

gymnasiums, and program spaces. A building also includes circulation spaces and construction factors such as wall thickness. This includes hallways, locker areas, vestibules, etc.

References: The most comprehensive analysis of programming

circulation factors in K-12 facilities has been developed by Fanning/Howey Associates Inc. which has offices in Florida, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Virginia.

Programming Circulation Factors in K-12 Facilities, October 21, 2002 indicates a recommended factor between 32 and 38 percent. This factor for circulation and construction was based on analysis of 158 schools constructed between the years of 1996 and 2002.

Conclusion: The suggested amount of space to be allocated for

construction and circulation is 35%.



DISTRICT PROTOTYPES

Memphis City Schools Shelby County Schools750 Students 1,000 Students

CLASSROOMS QTY S.F. TOTAL CLASSROOMS QTY S.F. TOTALEarly Childhood 1 1,100 1,100 Early Childhood [Not Applicable] 0 - - Kindergarten 5 940 4,700 Kindergarten Classes 10 850 8,500 Regular [grades 1-5] 29 800 23,200 Regular classrooms [grades 1-5] 40 780 31,200 Subtotal 35 29,000 Subtotal 50 39,700

Specialty Classrooms 5 850 4,250 Comprehensive Development Classrooms 4 950 3,800 Resource/Apex Classrooms [Not Applicable] 0 - - Resource/Apex Classrooms 4 375 1,500

4,250 5,300

TOTAL 40 33,250 58 45,000

OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL SPACES QTY S.F. TOTAL OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL SPACES QTY S.F. TOTALMusic 1 1,100 1,100 Music 2 1,000 2,000 Music Storage 1 200 200 Music Storage 1 320 320 Art Room & Storage 1 1,250 1,250 Art Room & Storage 1 1,500 1,500 Computer Lab 1 1,000 1,000 Computer Lab 1 900 900 Science/Math Lab 1 1,000 1,000 Learning Center/Prep Area 1 1,400 1,400

Oversized Classroom & Storage 1 1,200 1,200 TOTAL 4,550 TOTAL 7,320

PHYSICAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTAL PHYSICAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTALMulti-purpose Room 1 4,450 4,450 Gymnasium 1 8,000 8,000

PE Storage 1 450 450 TOTAL 4,450 TOTAL 8,450

STAGE/PLATFORM QTY S.F. TOTAL STAGE/PLATFORM QTY S.F. TOTALPlatform w/Multi-purpose Room 1 800 800 Platform w/Cafeteria 1 820 820

TOTAL 800 TOTAL 820

FOOD SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL FOOD SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTALDining Area 1 4,200 4,200 Dining Area 1 4,500 4,500 Kitchen 1 2,500 2,500 Kitchen 1 2,700 2,700

TOTAL 6,700 TOTAL 7,200

MEDIA CENTER QTY S.F. TOTAL MEDIA CENTER QTY S.F. TOTALReading Area 1 2,700 2,700 Reading Area 1 2,500 2,500 A/V & Material Storeroom 1 400 400 A/V & Material Storeroom 1 600 600 Teacher Production Room 1 225 225 Work Room 1 200 200 Conference Room 2 125 250 Conference Room 0 - - Librarian's Office 1 125 125 TOTAL 3,700 TOTAL 3,300

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL COMPARISON




ADMINISTRATION QTY S.F. TOTAL ADMINISTRATION QTY S.F. TOTALReception 1 800 800 Reception Area 1 500 500 Principal's Area 1 200 200 Principal's Office 1 315 315 Assistant Principal's Office 1 300 300 Adminstrator's Office 2 150 300 Conference Room 1 200 200 Conference Room 2 150 300 Health Center/Clinic 1 200 200 Health Center/Clinic 1 300 300 Records Room 1 100 100 Records Room 1 140 140 Office Supply Room 1 100 100 Office Supply Room 1 160 160 Secretaries Office 1 100 100 Secretaries Office 4 144 576 Restrooms 2 50 100 Restrooms 2 40 80 Book Storage Room 1 250 250 Book Storage Room 1 500 500 Teacher Work Areas/Offices 4 300 1,200 Teacher Work Areas/Offices 1 2,400 Financial Secretary Office 1 100 100 Coffee Area 1 40 40 Student Supply Store 1 150 150 Custodial Closet 1 50 50 Vault 1 100 100

TOTAL 3,950 TOTAL 5,611

STUDENT SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL STUDENT SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTALGuidance Area 1 910 910 Social Worker Office / Psychologist / Speech Therapist 1 180 180 Teachers Lounge 1 400 400 Parent Resource Room 1 300 300

TOTAL 1,790 TOTAL -

BUILDING SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL BUILDING SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTALPlant Maintenance Office 40% Factor Gymnasium Restrooms 1 700 700 Repair / Tool Room 40% Factor Restrooms - Main Bldg (Boys & Girls) 5 900 4,500 Storage (Secure) 40% Factor Supply Storage 1 140 140 Storage (Open) 40% Factor General Storage 2 250 500 Rest Rooms 40% Factor Plant Manager's Office 1 150 150 Custodial Closets 40% Factor Mechanical Room 1 250 250 Corridors, Hallways & Main Lobby 40% Factor Custodial Supply Rooms 4 100 400 Student / Public Restrooms 40% Factor Custodial Supply Room 1 150 150 Wall Factor (interior & exterior) 40% Factor Data Room 4 30 120

Outside equipment storage 1 200 200 Main Distribution Frame Room (MDF) 40% Factor Main Switch Room 1 250 250 Intermediate Distribution Frame Room (IDF) 40% Factor Electrical Panel and transformer rooms 5 50 250

Computer Network Equipment Room 1 270 270 Walls and Circulation 25% Factor

TOTAL 40% TOTAL 7,880

TOTAL 59,190 TOTAL 85,581 23,676 21,395

82,866 106,976

40% Factor 25% Factor


Memphis City Schools Memphis City Schools Shelby County Schools900 Students 1,200 Students 1,000 Students

CLASSROOMS QTY S.F. TOTAL CLASSROOMS QTY S.F. TOTAL CLASSROOMS QTY S.F. TOTALCore Team Instructional Classroom 23 800 18,400 Core Team Instructional Classroom 27 800 21,600 Regular Classroom 40 780 31,200

Resource (ESL, etc) 3 850 2,550 Resource (ESL, etc) 3 850 2,550 Special Education / Resource 4 450 1,800

TOTAL 20,950 TOTAL 24,150 TOTAL 33,600

OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL SPACES QTY S.F. TOTAL OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL SPACES QTY S.F. TOTAL OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL SPACES QTY S.F. TOTALInstrumental Music 1 2,500 2,500 Instrumental Music 1 2,500 2,500 Instrumental Music 1 1,900 1,900 Practice 3 80 240 Practice 3 80 240 Instrumental Music Practice 4 64 256 Ensemble Practice 1 150 150 Ensemble Practice 1 150 150 Vocal Music 1 1,200 1,200 Choral Music 1 1,550 1,550 Choral Music 1 1,550 1,550 Vocal Music Practice 2 64 128 Music Library 1 300 300 Music Library 1 300 300 Art 1 1,200 1,200 Music Office 1 150 150 Music Office 1 150 150 Art Storage / Kiln 1 300 300 Art 1 1,300 1,300 Art 1 1,300 1,300 Computer Lab 2 800 1,600 Dark Room 1 40 40 Dark Room 1 40 40 Science Lab 2 1,390 2,780 Computer Lab 1 850 850 Computer Lab 1 850 850 Oversize classroom 1 1,200 1,200 Home Room Science 6 800 4,800 Home Room Science 8 800 6,400 CDC (Comp. Development CR) 4 900 3,600 Science Lab 3 900 2,700 Science Lab 4 875 3,500 Exploratory [Speech & Drama] 1 1,090 1,090 Exploratory [Speech & Drama] 1 1,040 1,040 Exploratory 2 800 1,600 Exploratory 2 800 1,600

Storage 1 100 100 Storage 1 100 100 CLUE 3 850 2,550 CLUE 3 850 2,550 CDC 2 900 1,800 CDC 2 900 1,800 Teen Living 1 1,300 1,300 Teen Living 1 1,300 1,300 Exploring Technology 1 1,150 1,150 Exploring Technology 1 1,150 1,150


PHYSICAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTAL PHYSICAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTAL PHYSICAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTALGymnasium 1 15,250 15,250 Gymnasium 1 13,450 13,450 Gymnasium 1 10,280 10,280


MIDDLE SCHOOL COMPARISON



AUDITORIUM / PLATFORM QTY S.F. TOTAL AUDITORIUM / PLATFORM QTY S.F. TOTAL AUDITORIUM / PLATFORM QTY S.F. TOTALSeating Area 1 6,750 6,750 Seating Area 1 9,000 9,000 Platform 1 500 500 Performance Area & Wings 1 2,600 2,600 Performance Area & Wings 1 2,600 2,600 Dressing Room 2 168 336 Dressing Rooms & Restrooms 2 200 400 Dressing Rooms & Restrooms 2 200 400

TOTAL 9,750 TOTAL 12,000 TOTAL 836

FOOD SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL FOOD SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL FOOD SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTALDining Area 1 6,000 6,000 Dining Area 1 6,000 6,000 Dining Area 1 4,500 4,500 Kitchen Area 1 2,750 2,750 Kitchen Area 1 2,750 2,750 Kitchen 1 2,700 2,700


MEDIA CENTER QTY S.F. TOTAL MEDIA CENTER QTY S.F. TOTAL MEDIA CENTER QTY S.F. TOTALReading Area 1 3,000 3,000 Reading Area 1 3,000 3,000 Reading Area 1 2,500 2,500 Conference 1 300 300 Conference 1 300 300 Conference 1 300 300 A/V Equipment Storage 1 150 150 A/V Equipment Storage 1 150 150 A/V Storage 1 600 600 Material Storage 1 150 150 Material Storage 1 150 150 Workroom 1 200 200 Channel 1 Room 1 200 200 Channel 1 Room 1 200 200 Processing / Media 1 200 200 Processing / Media 1 200 200 Librarian Office 1 125 125 Librarian Office 1 125 125


ADMINISTRATION QTY S.F. TOTAL ADMINISTRATION QTY S.F. TOTAL ADMINISTRATION QTY S.F. TOTALGeneral Office w/ Reception & Waiting Area 1 800 800 General Office w/ Reception & Waiting Area 1 800 800 Reception Area 1 500 500 Principal's Area 1 175 175 Principal's Area 1 175 175 Principal's Office 1 315 315 Assistant Principal's Office 1 300 300 Assistant Principal's Office 1 300 300 Curriculum Coordinator 1 150 150 Financial Secretary's Office 1 100 100 Financial Secretary's Office 1 100 100 Admin Assistant Office 1 150 150 Conference Room 1 200 200 Conference Room 1 200 200 Technology Coordinator Office 1 150 150 Health Center 1 250 250 Health Center 1 250 250 Guidance Counselor 1 120 120 Records Room 1 75 75 Records Room 1 75 75 Attendance Secretary 1 120 120 Book Storage Room 1 250 250 Book Storage Room 1 250 250 Financial Secretary 1 120 120 Office Supply Storage Room 1 200 200 Office Supply Storage Room 1 200 200 Clinic 1 200 200 Student Supply Store 1 200 200 Student Supply Store 1 200 200 Records Room 1 160 160 Restroom 2 50 100 Restroom 2 50 100 Office Supplies Room 1 140 140 Student Management Information System Office 1 100 100 Student Management Information System Office 1 100 100 Telecommunications and EMS Room 1 80 80 Attendance Office 1 300 300 Attendance Office 1 300 300 Teacher Work Areas / Offices 1,200 Vault 1 100 100 Vault 1 100 100 Custodial Closet 1 30 30 Custodial Closet 1 30 30 Teacher Work Areas / Offices 4 300 1,200 Teacher Work Areas / Offices 4 300 1,200




STUDENT SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL STUDENT SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL STUDENT SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTALGuidance Area Guidance Area -

Reception 1 200 200 Reception 1 200 200 - Office 3 120 360 Office 3 120 360 - Conference Room 1 300 300 Conference Room 1 300 300 - Records Room 1 100 100 Records Room 1 100 100

Social Worker Office/ Psychologist / Speech Therapist Office 1 150 150

Social Worker Office/ Psychologist / Speech Therapist Office 1 150 150

In School Suspension Classroom 1 800 800 In School Suspension Classroom 1 800 800 In School Suspension 1 600 600 Rest Room 1 50 50 Rest Room 1 50 50

TOTAL 1,960 TOTAL 1,960 TOTAL 600

BUILDING SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL BUILDING SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL BUILDING SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTALPlant Manager Office + Restrooms [M/F] 1 200 200 Plant Manager Office + Restrooms [M/F] 1 200 200 Plant Managers Office 1 150 150 Repair / Tool Room 1 150 150 Repair / Tool Room 1 150 150 Mechanical 1 200 200 Storage (Secure) 1 150 150 Storage (Secure) 1 150 150 Supply Storage 1 140 140 Storage (Open) 1 100 100 Storage (Open) 1 100 100 Book Storage 1 500 500 Custodial Closets 43% Factor Custodial Closets 43% Factor General Storage 2 250 500 Main Distribution Frame Room (MDF) 1 150 150 Main Distribution Frame Room (MDF) 1 150 150 Main Switch Room 1 250 250 Intermediate Distribution Frame Room (IDF) 3 36 108 Intermediate Distribution Frame Room (IDF) 3 36 108 Electrical Panel & Transformer Room 5 50 250 Student / Public Restrooms 43% Factor Student / Public Restrooms 43% Factor Data Room 4 30 120 Corridors, Hallways, Main Lobby 43% Factor Corridors, Hallways, Main Lobby 43% Factor Custodial Supply 4 100 400 Wall Factor (interior & exterior) 43% Factor Wall Factor (interior & exterior) 43% Factor Computer Network Equipment 1 100 100 Teacher Restroom 8 50 400 Teacher Restroom 8 50 400 Restrooms 4 800 3,200

Walls and circulation 28% Factor


MCS adds 148 to subtotal formula for 90,741 sf 90,593 MCS adds 148 to subtotal formula for 96,741 sf 96,593 78,295 MCS has 39,019 for factor 38,955 MCS has 41,599 for factor 41,535 21,923

MCS has total of 129,760, difference of 212 sf 129,548 MCS has total of 138,340 difference of 212 sf 138,128 100,218

TOTAL TOTAL43% Factor 28% Factor

TOTAL43% Factor



HIGH SCHOOL COMPARISON

Memphis City Schools Memphis City Schools Shelby County Schools800 Students 1,200 Students 2,000 Students

CLASSROOMS QTY S.F. TOTAL CLASSROOMS QTY S.F. TOTAL CLASSROOMS QTY S.F. TOTALGeneral Classrooms 18 800 14,400 General Classrooms 28 800 22,400 General Classrooms 74 780 57,720Science Classrooms 6 800 4,800 Science Classrooms 8 800 6,400 Science Classrooms 4 1,300 5,200Science Labs 3 1,200 3,600 Science Labs 4 1,200 4,800 Science Labs 3 1,300 3,900

Storage 3 100 300 Storage 4 100 400 Storage 7 350 2,450Choral Music Room 1 1,125 1,125 Choral Music Room 1 1,125 1,125 Vocal Music Room 1 1,100 1,100Choral Robe Storage Room 1 300 300 Choral Robe Storage Room 1 300 300 Vocal Music Storage 1 400 400Music Office 1 125 125 Music Office 1 125 125 Vocal Music Office 1 120 120Portable Risers Storage 0 0 Portable Risers Storage 0 0 0 Music Offices 2 120 240Band Music Room 1 1,500 1,500 Band Music Room 1 1,500 1,500 Instrumental Music Room 1 2,800 2,800

Band Storage Room 1 600 600 Band Storage Room 1 600 600 Instrumental Music Storage 1 500 500Band Uniform Storage 1 200 200 Band Uniform Storage 1 200 200 0Orchestra Music Room 0 0 Orchestra Music Room 0 0 0 0Orchestra Storage 0 0 Orchestra Storage 0 0 0 0Individual Practice Rooms 6 40 240 Individual Practice Rooms 6 40 240 Practice Room 4 64 256Section Practice Room 1 150 150 Section Practice Room 1 150 150 0Music Library 1 200 200 Music Library 1 200 200 0Art Classroom 1 1,000 1,000 Art Classroom 1 1,000 1,000 Art Classroom 3 1,300 3,900Art Storage 1 400 400 Art Storage 1 400 400 Art Storage 2 500 1,000

Kiln Room 0 - 0 Kiln Room 0 0 0 Kiln Room 1 100 100Dark Room 1 50 50 Dark Room 1 50 50 0Theater Classroom 1 1,200 1,200 Theater Classroom 1 1,200 1,200 Drama Classroom 1 2,000 2,000Theater/Stageset Lab 0 - 0 Theater/Stageset Lab 0 0 0 0Theater Storage 1 300 300 Theater Storage 1 300 300 0Marketing Classroom 1 800 800 Marketing Classroom 1 800 800 Marketing Classroom 1 1,200 1,200Marketing Office 1 100 100 Marketing Office 1 100 100 Marketing Office 1 120 120Marketing Storage 1 100 100 Marketing Storage 1 100 100 0Information Systems Classroom 1 800 800 Information Systems Classroom 1 800 800 Computer Science Lab 1 900 900Information Systems Office 1 100 100 Information Systems Office 1 100 100 0Information Systems Storage 1 100 100 Information Systems Storage 1 100 100 0Computer/Software Tools Lab Classroom 1 800 800 Computer/Software Tools Lab Classroom 1 800 800 0Computer Lab Storage 1 50 50 Computer Lab Storage 1 50 50 0

TOTAL 57 33,340 TOTAL 71 44,240 109 83,906



CAREER & TECHNICAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTAL CAREER & TECHNICAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTAL CAREER & TECHNICAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTALDiversified Technology Classroom 1 1,200 1,200 Diversified Technology Classroom 1 1,200 1,200 Business & Information Classroom 1 1,000 1,000A/V Room 1 100 100 A/V Room 1 100 100 Keyboarding 1 1,000 1,000

Storage 1 100 100 Storage 1 100 100 Storage 1 200 200Communication and Media Tech. Classroom 0 0 Communication and Media Tech. Classroom 1 0 0Communication and Media Tech. Laboratory 0 0 Communication and Media Tech. Laboratory 1 0 Communication Technology Lab 1 2,500 2,500

Storage 0 0 Storage 1 0 0Trans. or Construction Tech. Classroom 1 1,200 1,200 Trans. or Construction Tech. Classroom 1 1,200 1,200 Residential Construction Technology Classroom 1 650 650Trans. or Construction Tech. Laboratory 1 2,000 2,000 Trans. or Construction Tech. Laboratory 1 2,000 2,000 Residential Construction Technology Lab 1 1,600 1,600

Storage 1 500 500 Storage 1 500 500 0Diversified Electronics/HVAC Repair Classrm. 0 0 Diversified Electronics/HVAC Repair Classrm. 1 0 Electronics Technology Classroom 1 650 650Diversified Electronics/HVAC Repair Lab 0 0 Diversified Electronics/HVAC Repair Lab 1 0 Electronics Technology Lab 1 1,600 1,600

Storage 0 0 Storage 1 0 0Metal/Plastic or Service Tech. Classroom 0 0 Metal/Plastic or Service Tech. Classroom 1 0 0Metal/Plastic or Service Tech. Lab 0 0 Metal/Plastic or Service Tech. Lab 1 0 0

Storage 0 0 Storage 1 0 0Family & Technology Sciences 1 1,950 1,950 Family & Technology Sciences 1 1,950 1,950 Family & Consumer Sciences Lab 2 1,600 3,200

Storage 1 250 250 Storage 1 250 250 0Culinary Arts Classroom 0 0 Culinary Arts Classroom 1 0 Agricultural Education Classroom 1 1,000 1,000Culinary Arts Laboratory 0 0 Culinary Arts Laboratory 1 0 Agricultural Education Greenhouse 1 1,200 1,200

Storage 0 0 Storage 1 0 Storage 2 150 300Apparel and Textile Careers Classroom 0 0 Apparel and Textile Careers Classroom 1 0 0Apparel and Textile Careers Laboratory 0 0 Apparel and Textile Careers Laboratory 1 0 Public Service Technology Lab 1 1,800 1,800

Storage 0 0 Storage 1 0 0Early Childhood Careers Classroom 1 800 800 Early Childhood Careers Classroom 1 800 800 0Early Childhood Careers Laboratory 1 1,000 1,000 Early Childhood Careers Laboratory 1 1,000 1,000 0

Storage 1 200 200 Storage 1 200 200 0Resource Room 1 100 100 Resource Room 1 100 100 0Rest Room 1 50 50 Rest Room 1 50 50 0

Health Science Technology Classroom/Lab 1 1,200 1,200 Health Science Technology Classroom 1 1,200 1,200 00 - 0 Health Science Technology Laboratory 1 - 0 Health Science Technology Laboratory 1 1,200 1,200

Storage 1 200 200 Storage 1 200 200 Storage 0Cosmetology Classroom/Lab 1 1,200 1,200 Cosmetology Classroom/Lab 1 1,200 1,200 0

Storage 1 200 200 Storage 1 200 200 0


SPECIAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTAL SPECIAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTAL SPECIAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTALClassroom (with restroom) 1 900 900 Classroom (with restroom) 1 900 900 Classroom (with restroom) 4 800 3,200

Storage 1 100 100 Storage 1 100 100 0Resource Room 1 800 800 Resource Room 1 800 800 Resource Room 4 400 1,600

Storage 1 50 50 Storage 1 50 50 0




OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL SPACES QTY S.F. TOTAL OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL SPACES QTY S.F. TOTAL OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL SPACES QTY S.F. TOTALROTC Classroom 1 800 800 ROTC Classroom 1 800 800 Computer Lab 1 1,000 1,000

Office 1 150 150 Office 1 150 150 Storage 1 200 200Storage 1 200 200 Storage 1 200 200 Study Hall 1 2,000 2,000Practice Range 1 1,600 1,600 Practice Range 1 1,600 1,600 Student Activities Room 1 800 800

Graphic Digital Design Area 1 500 500 Graphic Digital Design Area 1 800 800 0

Film-Making and TV Production Area 0 0 Film-Making and TV Production Area 0 0 0 0Video Conference Room 1 250 250 Video Conference Room 1 250 250 0


PHYSICAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTAL PHYSICAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTAL PHYSICAL EDUCATION QTY S.F. TOTALGymnasium 1 10,000 10,000 Gymnasium 1 14,000 14,000 Gymnasium [1 Phys. Ed. & 1 Varsity] 2 17,500Lobby 0 0 Lobby 0 0 Lobby 1 3,500 3,500Concessions 1 200 200 Concessions 1 200 200 Concessions 1 400 400Fitness/Weight Training Facility 1 800 800 Fitness/Weight Training Facility 1 800 800 Fitness/Weight Training Facility 1 1,000 1,000Aerobics/Wrestling Area 0 0 Aerobics/Wrestling Area 0 0 Aerobics/Wrestling Area 1 1,000 1,000Equipment Distribution Room 0 0 Equipment Distribution Room 1 400 400 Equipment Distribution Room 2 750 1,500Laundry 1 200 200 Laundry 1 200 200 Laundry 1 300 300Locker Rooms 2 1,500 3,000 Locker Rooms 2 1,500 3,000 Locker Rooms 8 5,300Female Coaches Office 1 175 175 Female Coaches Office 1 175 175 Office 4 120 480Male Coaches Office 1 175 175 Male Coaches Office 1 175 175 0Athletic Director's Office 1 100 100 Athletic Director's Office 1 100 100 0Lifetime Wellness Classroom 1 800 800 Lifetime Wellness Classroom 1 800 800 0Trainer's Room and Physical Therapy 1 250 250 Trainer's Room and Physical Therapy 1 250 250 0Storage 2 400 800 Storage 1 400 400 0Custodial Closet 1 100 100 Custodial Closet 1 100 100 0Field House Storage 1 300 300 Field House Storage 1 500 500


AUDITORIUM QTY S.F. TOTAL AUDITORIUM QTY S.F. TOTAL AUDITORIUM QTY S.F. TOTALAuditorium 1 10,200 10,200 Auditorium 1 11,700 11,700 Auditorium 1 9,500 9,500

Includes control booth, wings, and stage Includes control booth, wings, and stage Includes sound/light booths, backstage and stage 0Dressing Rooms 2 200 400 Dressing Rooms 2 200 400 Dressing Rooms 2 200 400Director's Office 1 100 100 Director's Office 1 100 100 Fine Arts/Theater Office & Work Area 1 350 350Ticket Sales 1 50 50 Ticket Sales 1 50 50 Ticket Sales 1 60 60Stage Craft Equipment Area 1 1,000 1,000 Stage Craft Equipment Area 1 1,000 1,000 0Concession Area 1 200 200 Concession Area 1 200 200 0

Back Stage Prop Storage 1 800 800Costume Storage 1 400 400


FOOD SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL FOOD SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL FOOD SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTALDining Area 1 5,000 5,000 Dining Area 1 6,000 6,000 Dining Area 1 7,000 7,000Kitchen 1 2,710 2,710 Kitchen 1 2,750 2,750 Kitchen 1 3,670 3,670

Serving Lines 4 250 1,000




M DIA CENTER QTY S.F. TOTAL MEDIA CENTER QTY S.F. TOTAL MEDIA CENTER QTY S.F. TOTALReading Area [Stacks, seating, computers, displays] 1 3,675 3,675 Reading Area [Stacks, seating, computers, displays] 1 5,000 5,000 Reading Area [Circulation, reference] 1 4,600 4,600Librarian's Office 1 100 100 Librarian's Office 1 100 100

E

Work Room 2 250 500Conference Room 0 - 0 Conference Room 1 250 250 Conference Room 1 300 300A/V & Material Storeroom 1 350 350 A/V & Material Storeroom 1 350 350 A/V & Material Storeroom 1 800 800Processing Media Room 1 175 175 Processing Media Room 1 175 175 Copy and Production Room 1 300 300Closed Circuit Equipment Room 1 50 50 Closed Circuit Equipment Room 1 50 50 Instructional Computer Lab 1 1,000 1,000

Instructional Computer Lab Storage 1 200 200Periodical Storage 1 300 300


ADMINISTRATION QTY S.F. TOTAL ADMINISTRATION QTY S.F. TOTAL ADMINISTRATION QTY S.F. TOTALReception 1 800 800 Reception 1 800 800 Reception 1 600 600Principal's Area 1 200 200 Principal's Area 1 200 200 Principal's Area 1 300 300Assistant Principal's Office 1 150 150 Assistant Principal's Office 1 150 150 Vice-Principal's Office 1 200 200Conference Room 1 400 400 Conference Room 1 400 400 Assistant Principal's Office 4 150 600Records Room 1 75 75 Records Room 1 75 75 Conference Room 1 450Office Supply Room 1 300 300 Office Supply Room 1 300 300 Records Room 1 300 300Restrooms 2 50 100 Restrooms 2 50 100 Office Supply Room 2 500Book Storage Room 1 225 225 Book Storage Room 1 225 225 Restrooms 1 100 100Student Supply Store 1 250 250 Student Supply Store 1 250 250 Book Storage Room 4 500 2,000Business Office 1 100 100 Business Office 1 100 100 Financial Secretary 1 120 120Attendance Office 1 300 300 Attendance Office 1 300 300 Attendance Office 1 500 500Teacher Work Areas/Offices 1 250 250 Teacher Work Areas/Offices 1 250 250 Teacher Work Areas/Offices [incl 2 RR & 2 phone rooms] 5 500 2,500Teacher Planning Rooms 6 300 1,800 Teacher Planning Rooms 8 300 2,400 Copy Room/Work Area 1 200 200Campus Safety Office 1 100 100 Campus Safety Office 1 100 100 General Office 2 100 200Custodial Closet 0 0 Custodial Closet 1 30 30 0Vault 1 100 100 Vault 1 100 100

TOTAL 5,150 TOTAL 5,780 TOTAL 8,5700 0

STUDENT SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL STUDENT SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL STUDENT SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTALGuidance Area Guidance Area Guidance Area

Reception 1 200 200 Reception 1 200 200 Reception 1 500 500Office 1 320 320 Office 3 160 480 Office 6 120 720Conference Room 1 275 275 Conference Room 1 275 275 Conference Room 2 600

0 0 Records Room 1 400 4000 0 Copy Room/Work Area 1 200 2000 0 Rest Room 1 100 100

In-School Suspension Classroom 1 800 800 In-School Suspension Classroom 1 800 800 In-School Suspension Classroom 1 750 750Rest Room 1 50 50 Rest Room 1 0 0 Rest Room 2 60 120

Health Center/Clinic 1 225 225 Health Center/Clinic 1 225 225 Health Center/Clinic 1 300 3000 0 Records Room 1 120 1200 0 Rest Room 1 100 100

Parent Resource Room 1 150 150 Parent Resource Room 1 150 150 0College/Career Center 1 400 400 College/Career Center 1 400 400 0Social Worker Office 1 125 125 Social Worker Office 1 125 125 0

0 Psychologist/Speech Therapist Office 0 0 0 00 ESL Office 0 0 0 0




BUILDING SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL BUILDING SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTAL BUILDING SERVICES QTY S.F. TOTALPlant Maintenance Office + Restrooms [M/F] 1 200 200 Plant Maintenance Office 1 200 200 Plant Maintenance Office 1 150 150Storage (Secure) 1 150 150 Storage (Secure) 1 150 150 General Storage 4 400 1,600Storage (Open) 1 100 100 Storage (Open) 1 100 100 General Storage 1 650 650Student/Public Restrooms 43% Factor Student/Public Restrooms 43% Factor Lobby Rest Rooms 2 750 1,500Rest Rooms 43% Factor Rest Rooms 43% Factor Rest Rooms 8 800 6,400Custodial Closets 43% Factor Custodial Closets 43% Factor Custodial Closets 8 100 800Corridors, Hallways & Main Lobby 43% Factor Corridors, Hallways & Main Lobby 43% Factor Corridors, Hallways & Main Lobby 30% FactorWall Factor (interior & exterior) 43% Factor Wall Factor (interior & exterior) 43% Factor Wall Factor (interior & exterior) 30% FactorMain Distribution Frame Room (MDF) 150 Main Distribution Frame Room (MDF) 150 Network Equipment Room 1 300 300Intermediate Distribution Frame Room (IDF) 108 Intermediate Distribution Frame Room (IDF) 120 0Repair/Tool Room 1 150 150 Repair/Tool Room 1 150 150 0Locker Area 0 0 Locker Area 0 0 0Teacher Rest Rooms 12 50 600 Teacher Rest Rooms 16 50 800 0

Mechanical, Electrical & IDF Rooms 2,400Elevator & Equipment Room 1 400 400


TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE S.F. TOTAL TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE S.F. TOTAL TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE S.F. TOTALNet Square Footage 101,003 Net Square Footage 121,470 Net Square Footage 199,446

Revised Program Spaces 101,003 Revised Program Spaces 121,470 Revised Program Spaces 199,44643% Circulation Factor 43,431 43% Circulation Factor 52,232 30% Circulation Factor 59,834Gross Square Footage 144,434 Gross Square Footage 173,702 Gross Square Footage 259,280




SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION COST DATA The following cost data has been compiled from nationally published sources to establish a basis of comparison for the study of Shelby County and Memphis City Schools. References: Annual School Construction Report, School Planning and

Management Magazine

Annual Official Education Construction Report, American School and University Magazine

R. S. Means Company

Conclusions:

$ 93.57 Adjusted Shelby Co. $108.48 Adjusted Memphis High School $137.24 School Planning & Management (National Median) $113.76 School Planning & Management (National Low Quartile) $115.27 School Planning & Management (Regional) $118.00 American School & University $119.00 R. S. Means Co. (Locally Adjusted) $117.09 Adjusted Shelby Co. $132.38 Adjusted Memphis

Findings for most recent data (new construction): Elementary $131.82 School Planning & Management (National Median) $113.54 School Planning & Management (National Low Quartile) $116.50 School Planning & Management (Regional) $114.00 American School & University $105.00 R. S. Means Co. (Locally Adjusted) $ 91.22 Adjusted Shelby Co. $105.89 Adjusted Memphis Middle School $129.75 School Planning & Management (National Median) $113.54 School Planning & Management (National Low Quartile) $116.40 School Planning & Management (Regional) $194.00 American School & University $105.00 R. S. Means Co. (Locally Adjusted)


Elementary Schools – New

iles of New ElementarProfSc

y schools Profiles of New Elementary schoolsManagem

Report Cost per Square f eport Cost per Square feet Number o

hool Planning & ent American School & UniversityNational Median National Median

eet Number of Cost per R f Cost perear sq. foot per student students student year sq. foot per student students student

2005 $131.82 122004 $120.83 122003 $118.06 11 $113.00 146.0 650 $16,4622002 $113.30 116.1 2002 $125.00 99.0 550 $14,477

2001 $152.82 118.0 504 $15,405

Low Quartile National MeanSquare feet Number of Cost per Report Cost per Square feet Number o

y0.0 600 $16,667 2005 will be published in May5.0 570 $15,833 2004 $114.00 133.0 500 $13,8534.4 625 $13,600 2003

650 $13,333

NationalReport Cost per f Cost per

per student students student year sq. foot per student students student5 ill be published May

$128.00 134.0 515 $16,7952002 10 epo d

on 4

year sq. foot2005 $113.54 100.3 450 $13,203 200 w in 2004 $97.56 100.8 400 $11,430 200 not reported42003 $94.49 103.6 500 $10,769 2003

$92.30 0.0 500 $10,000 2002 not r rte2001 not reported

Regi Region 4( b tyer Report r

not s pe)eparated by uilding quare f ost pe quareReport Cost per S eet Number of Cost p C S feet Number of Cost per

y sq. foot pe ent students studen s per ent students studentear r stud year q. foot stud2005 12 2005 ill be published in May

2003 $101.43 115.9 625 $11,994 2003 not reported$103.00 145.0 500 $7,000

0.0 1 0

on 5quare f

ear r stud2005 14 ,742

, SC, TN

.S. Meeport egionaear justm

ph2005 87.8

efini h ncy nd is as umed t.

t$116.50 0.0 600 $16,667 w

2004 $109.35 135.0 550 $14,101 2004 not reported

2002 $105.98 114.8 700 $13,333 20022001 $10 0 25.0 575 $10,50

RegiReport Cost per S eet Number of Cost pery sq. foot pe ent students student

$133.60 6.1 450 $19

region 4 = SC, NC, TN, KY region 4 = AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC5 = GA, MS, AL, FLregion

Profiles of New Elementary schoolsR ansR Median R l Adjusted Note: The d tion of Region 4 is different for eacy cost/sf ad ent cost / sf reporting age a s o represent the

bles(National) (Mem is) cost varia$120 0% $105

20042003 $103.00 85.70% $88



Middle Schools – New

Profiles of New Middle schools Profiles of New Middle schoolsSchool Planning & Management American School & UniversityNational Median National MedianReport Cost per Square feet Number of Cost per Report Cost per Square feet Number of Cost peryear sq. foot per student students student year sq. foot per student students student

2005 $129.75 148.3 750 $20,000 2005 will be published in May2004 $130.00 145.4 800 $19,286 2004 $194.00 141.0 700 $18,4502003 $118.06 114.4 625 $13,600 2003 $167.00 159.0 850 $20,0002002 $113.30 116.1 650 $13,333 2002 $159.00 177.0 450 $18,086

2001 $135.90 119.0 629 $16,290

National Low Quartile National MeanReport Cost per Square feet Number of Cost per Report Cost per Square feet Number of Cost peryear sq. foot per student students student year sq. foot per student students student

2005 $113.54 100.3 450 $13,203 2005 will be published in May2004 $99.92 124.8 600 $14,084 2004 not reported2003 $102.94 118.2 680 $12,500 2003 $149.00 153.0 650 $16,0332002 $98.33 122.2 750 $12,774 2002 not reported

2001 not reported

Region 4 Region (not separated by building type)Report Cost per Square feet Number of Cost per Report Cost per Square feet Number of Cost peryear sq. foot per student students student year sq. foot per student students student

2005 $116.40 120 600 $16,667 2005 will be published in May2004 $120.81 140.1 725 $16,333 2004 not reported2003 $98.87 143.7 750 $13,211 2003 not reported2002 $90.78 170.8 1200 $17,050 2002 $103.00 145.0 500 $7,000

2001 $104.00 126.0 900 $11,714

Region 5Report Cost per Square feet Number of Cost peryear sq. foot per student students student

2005 $138.46 142.9 600 $21,429

region 4 = SC, NC, TN, KY region 4 = AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TNregion 5 = GA, MS, AL, FL

Profiles of New Middle SchoolsR.S. MeansReport Median Regional Adjustedyear cost/sf adjustment cost / sf

(National) (Memphis)2005 $120 87.80% $10520042003 $102.00 85.70% $87

Note: The definition of Region 4 is different for each reporting agency and is assumed to represent the cost variables.



High Schools – New

Profiles of New High schools Profiles of New High schoolsSchool Planning & Management American School & UniversityNational Median National MedianReport Cost per Square feetNumber of Cost per Report Cost per Square feet Number of Cost peryear sq. foot per student students student year sq. foot per student students student

2005 $137.24 167.0 1200 $24,641 2005 will be published in May2004 $131.82 168.1 1200 $21,771 2004 $118.00 178.0 1450 $25,9002003 $122.16 154.2 1200 $19,438 2003 $123.00 134.0 765 $16,6162002 $119.24 147.9 1200 $17,500 2002 $159.00 134.0 600 $13,174

2001 $158.68 114.0 830 $18,316

National Low Quartile National MeanReport Cost per Square feetNumber of Cost per Report Cost per Square feet Number of Cost peryear sq. foot per student students student year sq. foot per student students student

2005 $113.76 131.2 641 $17,817 2005 will be published in May2004 $108.04 147.1 588 $18,000 2004 not reported2003 $103.45 131.3 900 $14,886 2003 $158.00 166.0 979 $23,4092002 $98.33 122.2 750 $12,774 2002 not reported

2001 not reported

Region 4 Region (not separated by building type)Report Cost per Square feetNumber of Cost per Report Cost per Square feet Number of Cost peryear sq. foot per student students student year sq. foot per student students student

2005 $115.27 179.0 1319 $22,941 2005 will be published in May2004 $115.38 160.0 1200 $18,750 2004 not reported2003 $108.70 175.0 1200 $18,824 2003 not reported2002 $90.78 170.8 1200 $17,050 2002 $103.00 145.0 500 $7,000

2001 $100.00 138.0 700 $15,607

Region 5Report Cost per Square feetNumber of Cost peryear sq. foot per student students student

2005 $159.00 200.0 807 $31,800

region 4 = SC, NC, TN, KY region 4 = AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TNregion 5 = GA, MS, AL, FL

Profiles of New High SchoolsR.S. MeansReport Median Regional Adjustedyear cost/sf adjustment cost / sf

(National) (Memphis)2005 $136.00 0.8780 $11920042003 $122.00 0.8570 $105

Note: The definition of Region 4 is different for each reporting agency and is assumed to represent the cost variables.



SYSTEM & Sub grou

SiteM


ATERIAL

Price variance based on Shelby Co.stated costElemn MS HS NotesSCSD MCSD SCSD MCSD SCSD MCSD

p Location/type Shelby County Memphis City 85.00 85.00 85.00 85.00 110.00 110.00paving asph or conc

curbs @ drive & park conc curb/gutter @ bus Conc bumper @ parking

8"thk conc @ dock8" conc @ dumpsters(2) 8" conc @ dumpsters (3)6' conc min sidewalk(20' at student entry)seeding & sodding, sodding prefered

per owners decisionstorm water downspouts to under downspouts to under

ground drains ground drainsUtilities all underground all undergroundFence ? perimeter @ undeveloped

& residential neighborsExterior wall face Brick or unit masonry brick (no precast)

wall insulation 1" foam bd in cavitywall damproof asph. emul. In cavitywindows (1) 2' 6 x 5' 4 per CR alum.,

single hunginsect screensafety screen 0.99 0.85 0.70

ext doors HM, galvn HM(no wood)

Roof insulation, base 3 polyiso, mech fast.insulation, top 1/2 perliteroof covering Mod Bitumen 1- Metal 4.00 4.00 4.00

2- Shingles3- Built-up (Mod Bit)

drainage gutter & ds gutter & ds(interior not allowed) (interior not allowed)

skylights not allowedparapets to hide roof membrane cover

rooftop eqpt on backvents,caps,etc galvn

Interiordoors HM, extra heavy duty solid wood w/ Plam

(no wood) HM if rated

Interior Kindergartenfinish floor part carpet (OS&I) part carpet / vinyl tile

/ vctwalls cmu/ semi gloss spl gyp bd / semi gls

ceiling 2x4 fiberglas act actClassroom

floor vct vinyl tilewalls cmu / semi gloss spl gyp bd / semi gls

ceiling 2x4 fiberglas act actMusic/Band

floor carpet (OS&I) carpet 0.43 0.33 0.20 allowancewalls cmu / semi gloss spl gyp bd / semi gls for all

ceiling 2x4 fiberglas act act carpetLibrary

floor carpet (OS&I) carpetwalls cmu / semi gloss spl gyp bd / semi gls

ceiling 2x4 fiberglas act actArt


ceiling 2x4 fiberglas act actComputer tech

floor carpet (OS&I) vinyl tilewalls cmu / semi gloss spl gyp bd / semi gls

ceiling 2x4 fiberglas act actCafet


ceiling 2x4 fiberglas act actMP / gym

floor vct if MP, wd if gym VT if MP, WD if gymwalls cmu / semi gloss

ceiling exp/ptd exp / ptdKit

floor 2x2 non skid tile Quarry tilewalls cmu semi gloss CT to 7' / ptd gyp abv

ceiling washable 2x4 act washable 2x4 actLocker rms

floor 2 x 2 non skid tile ?walls cmu / semi gloss

ceiling ptd gyb bd w/ backerToilet Rms

floor 2x2 non skid tile cer tilewalls cmu / semi gloss cmu wet wall, spl gyp

6' cer tile, boys rm cer tile full hgtceiling ptd gyp bd w/ backer spl gyp bd / semi gls

Mech rmsfloor conc sealed concwalls cmu ptd cmu

ceiling exposed / paint exp Admin/off/conf

floor carpet (OSCI) carpetwalls gyp bd on mtl stud / flat gyp bd

ceiling 2x4 fiberglas act actCorridor

floor vct vctwalls cmu /semi gloss cmu / semi-gloss

ceiling 2x4 fiberglas act act

COMPARISON


DeJONG JAED

Price variance based on Shelby Co.stated costElemn MS HS NotesSCSD MCSD SCSD MCSD SCSD MCSD

Sub group Location/type Shelby County Memphis City 85.00 85.00 85.00 85.00 110.00 110.00Fire & security F Exting by owner by owner

Sprinklers throughout throughoutF. alarm "ring down" by owner ?Elec. security by owner emrty conduit

by othersExt doors Desig doors - Mag lock, 0.28 0.20 0.12

card read, CCTV to admin, remote release

Structureseismic zone 3f glas in slabs / no wwf

HVAC Systems 9.00 9.00 9.00 reflectsTypical Rooms gas RTU HVAC per rm fan coil HVAC abv clg changing

(tempered fresh air ducted (tempered fresh air ducted standardsper zone,no economizer) per zone, economizer) of both(if no gas, heat pump No Roof Mount systemswithout economizer)

Kitchen RTU H&V only ACGym RTU H&V only AC

Admin AC,ducted returns ACFuel nat gas gas assumedBoiler not reqd pkg water tubeChiller not reqd water cooled, indoorPiping not reqd 4 pipe, standard now

shifting to 2 pipeDucts mtl w/ internal insul

(no f glas or flex)Ventilation ASHRAE

Kit dishwash both ends of unitKit exterior door fly fan fly fan

Kit dryer wall ventArt room Kiln w/ wall switch

Science Lab Rm exhaust w/ 30minute timer

Controls per room/RTU energy manag sysmotor start on all eqptEMS by equip by owner,

Electrical contr installPhase monit sys required reqd

Intercom empty conduit, complete 1.65 1.65 1.65 1.65 1.65 1.65by owner

Telephone empty conduit, empty conduit,by owner by owner

TV empty conduit, empty conduit,by owner by others

Sound system empty conduit, required 0.23 0.30 0.59 0.43 0.24 0.40by owner

Gym scoreboard empty conduit, 2 required 0.12 0.13 0.10 0.16by owner

Computer network empty conduit, complete 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00by owner

Fire alarm required required

Emerg Generator required., gas reqd @ MS & HS, gas

LightingCR 50 fc, 2 level switch 40-60 fc, 3 tube, 2 lvl sw

corr 1/2 watt 20 fcGym HID plus incand. 40-60 fc, Mtl hal w/ quartz

Program. Clocks in corridor corr, MP, Aud, Cafet,Gym

Isolated ground sys no required, separate 0.60 0.60 0.48circuit w/ 3 duplex / CR

Equipment"chalkboard",typ 16 lf 16' lfDisplay board 8 lf 2 @ 8 lfroom numb./names by owner reqd. 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02stor room shelving by owner reqd.window treatment by owner reqd., mini-blinds 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06lockers Corr/ lkr rm by owner reqd., 1.36 1.36 1.24 1.25 1.00 1.02folding bleachers by owner, pwr. by contr required 0.82 1.37 0.56 1.13Bldg sign by owner ?Toilet access. owner supply, required

contractor installToil partns solid conc plaster on standard,solid phonelic

stl.frame w/ plywd doorKitchen eqpt. owner supply, owner supply,

contractor install contractor installWalk-in ref / frz by owner by owner

Sci Lab owner supply, required 1.33 1.48 1.10 1.37contractor install

Library owner supply, required 0.45 0.61 0.39 0.43 0.16 0.27owner install

Total variance 91.22 105.89 93.57 108.48 117.09 132.38Adjusted cost/sf for matl 176.22 190.89 ##### 193.48 227.09 242.38

Prevailing wages no reqd by city(Tenn. rates) 213.80 216.70 271.47 10%Fringe benefits no reqd by city(City rates) w/ above

difference before wage rates 14.67 14.91 15.29 difference with wage rates 37.58 38.13 44.38

Source: design standards of Shelby County School System and Memphis City SchoolsNote: Another section of this report ilustrates a wage rate cost differential as low as 2% for new const. To as much as 19% for additions with an average of 10.2%. We are aware of a study from the University of Memphis that calculates an impact of 11%.

SYSTEM & MATERIAL COMPARISON [Cont.]

Preliminary Report A-23 06/16/2005



REVAILING WAGES

ost impact of requiring compliance with Prevailing Wage Predetermination of school projects is available, however comparing it and deriving

ions is difficult. The following articles/reports were reviewed in preparation of this study and may provide additional information. References: Do Lower Prevailing Wages Reduce Public Construction Costs?,

Prepared by Howard Wial for the Keystone Research Center and published in July, 1999.

The Effects of the Exemption of School Construction Projects from Ohio’s Prevailing Wage Law, Prepared by the Legislative Service Commission and published May 20, 2002

Prevailing Wage Laws and School Construction Costs, Prepared by Mark J. Prus, PhD for Prince Georges Co. Md. and published in January 1999

More and Better Schools with Repeal of Prevailing Wage, Prepared as a Special Report by the Washington Research Council and published Dec. 20, 1999

Commentary:

1. The study for Prince Georges County:

Cited a study prepared by the Maryland Interagency Committee in 1988. They estimated savings of roughly 15% based on an analysis of 20 schools (8 new and 12 renovations).

The data from the earlier report was re-worked in the study by considering new construction only and estimated a lower cost premium of only 4.5%. The new and renovation projects were then analyzed together and the cost difference was determined to be approximately 13 percent.

The size of the study was expanded by using data obtained from F. W. Dodge Co. for school construction in Maryland from 1991 to 1997. This data base included 186 projects (both public and private) of which 38% were new but only 6% were subject to wage rates.

The expanded study determined that private schools cost 40.6% less than public schools, but the ratio of private to public schools included in the study was not stated. An assumption was stated that the lower cost is because they are not subject to prevailing wage rates and that standards of spaces for programs and for materials are not as stringent.

The overall determination was that an estimated cost difference of only 1.9% was realized.

The overall determination is in question because of the mixing of public and private projects with their acknowledged different design

P Data on the cfor construction conclus


standards, and the small number (11 of 168) projects that were subject to wage rates.

the elimination of Wage Rates: New construction 1.2%

2. The study by the Ohio Service Commission:

Estimated savings available from Additions 19.9%

Alterations 10.7% Average 10.2%

Bid Received bids for an $8.5m phase of a $27m bond issue, Alterations

& additions to 2 Middle Schools and 1 High School. Sep

con Bid submitted as both Prevailing Wage and Non-

prevailing Wage. Res

and$.5

Low bidders were both Union & Non-union in a heavily unionized area. They drew a conclusion that even greater savings should be in rural areas and areas with lower union concentration.

Conclusions:

rojects is the lowest, typically

ore highly skilled trades.

s at Westlake City SD, Cuyahoga, OH

arate bids for 4 trades each for the 3 projects (total of 12 tracts) s required to be

ult of low bids for total projects was $8.7m to use prevailing wages $8.2m for contracts without prevailing wages. A saving of approx.

m (5.8%) was realized.

1. Mandatory wage rates increase the cost of construction projects.

2. The impact on new construction pin the range of 1% to 5%.

3. The impact on alteration and addition projects is greater from a low of approx. 6% to as much as 20%. This apparently is the result of varying project scopes, often concentrating on a smaller number of m



ment Committee Individual & Group Results

Introduction

rticipants of the Needs were completed individually.

the questionnaire as a roup. Results are as follows.

1. Should the foot/student] for both the Memphis Cappropriate bo

Needs Assess

April 5, 2005

On April 5, 2005, the following questionnaire was distributed to paAssessment Committee Meeting. Nineteen questionnairesParticipants were then split into five teams and asked to complete g

re be common space requirements [squareity Schools and the Shelby County Schools? Please place a check the

x.

Yes No

Ind. Group Ind. Group

5 1 14 5

Comm

Different programs require different spaces [4]

Co Gu as otal sq. footage for academic gross building area: different in

urban setting with stairways and multi-stories Different in size, different academic requirements, counseling, and

community support activities Demographics No responses: designed for flexible use, different

student/community needs, demographics, areas of annexation Common requirements for elementary, middle and high schools Evaluate criteria – best practices and guiding principals Yes – Why send different money for different schools? No – The fact that you allow different square feet doesn’t mean

different dollars. No – The systems offer different programs, there should be a

range.

ents:

There are different educational needs between the systems [3] Different student needs [2] Square footage needs are program driven [2] But we must consider whether the facility serves other community needs – is it available for community functions – when? Community use of facilities

st savings via common design idelines, not requirements ed on % of IDP’s and special ed students B

T



2. Should a common required cost per square foot be utilized to determine project costs

for both the Memphis C Schools? Please place a check in the appropriate b

Yes No

ity Schools and the Shelby Countyox.

Ind. Group Ind. Group

7 2 12 3

Comments:

A range allowing flexibility within reason [2] Within a specified range [2] The needs are different, the educational program is different,

building issues, etc Unless contractors can be held to “set” prices – also, special

needs students need more space Square foota nd cost shoul based on a set of common

criteria and best practices to fit the community served by the school r ormula

But need to account for different land cost/amounts available, etc. Factors ch as union wage scale must be taken into

consideration Basically, not certain – but the key word here is “required”;

should be given to keeping costs aligned but not

igh cial ed students

iling wage

tween the

ct, it hinders and limits the bidding contractors can be held to a certain price.

10-20% range: urban construction costs

facilities, equipment, etc.

ge a d be

ather than a set f

su

considerationrequired – again, based on need

Yes, per type of student, e.g. elementary, middle school, hschool, technical school, spe

Different student needs, community use, preva Educational plan → design plan → costs per foot. All things being

equal, there should be a direct and equal correlation beconstruction costs.

Different student populations Building practices Different community needs Need to use our schools for more than education; community

centers. Prevailing wage [3]

Problem with “x” for a projeprocess unless

There should be a range – helps entire project. 90% of the citizens of Memphis would say YES.

Different site context and site development issues [2] Perception that it is the same market area Common palette of materials Building system should be the same.

Yes, but within a Security requirements, common areas, special programming,

athletic



In order to further refine and assist the NAC in developing uniform guidelines, please

iew the following categories of capital planning and answer the following questions. rev

A. Growth des new construction and additions Inclu

B. Immediate Needs ergency projects to maintain “safe, dry, & ea

Includes emh lthy”

C. Building Renovations Includes programmat updates and system replacements that are no mediate

ic t im

D. Building Replacement Includes replacement of facilities past their useful life

E SchMergers m two facilities into one ool Closures & Includes combining students fro

3. Should there Shelby County? Please place h

be common priorities for both the Memphis City Schools and the

a c eck the appropriate box.

Yes No N/A

Ind. Group Ind. Group Ind. Group

5 1.5 12 3.5 2 0

Comments:

a sedu ust be addressed using a common

alized needs of each area can be a

c

Priorities will differ based upon needs io Mu f ple, the city

s the program county system.

read w Eac dependently.

A little of both – there is a common priority of both systems to provide uperior public education for all students. To provide that cation, all facilities’ needs m

approach. However, the individuev luated independently. Ea h district has different priorities and should be able to follow (within set guidelines)

Pr rities based on student profiles The needs differ – county growth, city differed maintenance, ADA

st study where each is at this point in time Dif erent demographics and facilities Not sure what type of priorities you refer to. For examsy therefore tem has a higher degree of poverty andpriorities probably should be different from the Mixed reviews but there was a common thLo enrollment Greater need for new buildings School size

h system should be able to plan in



4. If you answered yes to question #3, please rank, in order of importance, the

following capital planning categories. If you answered no to question #3, please rank order the categories for both districts and indicate which district you are ranking. [1 = most important]

Both School Districts (individua

Ran u 1

l questionnaire only)

k N mber 2 3 4 5 6 NA

A. Gro wth 1

B. Immediate Needs 1

C. ui ing Renovations 1 B ld

D. Building Replacement 1

E. SchMergers ool Closures & 1

F. Other: Flexible and Joint Use of Schools

Memphis City Sc Dis

Rank Number 1 2 4 5 6 NA

hool trict

3

Ind. Grp. Ind. Grp. Ind. Grp. Ind. Grp. Ind. Grp. Ind. Grp. Ind. Grp.

A. Growth 1 2 1 11 5 1 3

B. Immediate Needs 14 5 2 3 3

C. Building Renovations 3 7 2 4 2 3 1 2

D. Building Replacement 3 1 1 5 3 9 1 1

E. School Closures & Mergers

3 3 2 5 3 2 2 1 3

F.

Other: Flexible and Joint Use of Schools

3

1 1



Shelby County School District

Rank Number 1 2 3 4 5 NA

Ind. Grp. Ind. Grp. Ind. Grp. Ind. Grp. Ind. Grp. Ind. Grp.

A. Growth 11 5 6 2

B. Immediate Needs 6 1 10 3 1 1 2

C. Building Renovations 2 14 5 1 2

D. Building Replacement 1 1 16 4 2

E. School Closures & Mergers 1 15 5 3

F. Other: Flexible and Joint Use of Schools

1 2

Comments: School closures and mergers can have a higher priority when combined with

the savings impact in current and future operational expenditures. I cannot rank this system due to lack of familiarity with needs and priorities. If growth has exceeded capacity than A. = 1. Life safety issues State law/authority gives the Boards of Education the ability to make these

decisions. Millington and Chimney Rock are examples of Shelby County Schools that

have immediate needs.



5. ranked important most important [1, 2 or both] be

funded, or should there be dollars allocated to each category?

Fund only a

high F e

o

Should only the categories you

those r nked und categ

ach ry

Ind Group Ind. Group.

2 0 17 5

If you indicated funding for each category, suggest what percentage should be ed. Please write in e pe nta am t i e s ce provided.

ho Term [1-2 rs

appli

th rce ge oun n th pa

S rt yea ]

0-25% 26-50% 51-75% 76-100%

Ind. Group Ind. Group Ind. Group Ind. Group

A. Growth 8 1 5 2 0 1 0 0

B. Immediate Needs 6 3 8 0 0 0 0 0

C. Bu nRenov

ildi g ations 13 3 0 1 0 0 0 0

D. Bu nRe c 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 ildi g

pla ement 12

E. SchooClo rMerge

l su es &

rs 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

F. Other: 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



Long Term [3-10 years]

0-25% -50% 51-75% 76-100% 26

Ind. G Grou Group Ind. Grouproup Ind. p Ind.

A. Growth 7 0 3 3 0 1 1 0

B. Immediate 9 2 1 1 0 0 1 0 Needs

C. 8 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 Building Renovations

D. Building Replacement 6 2 5 1 0 0 0 0

E. School Closures & Mergers

11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

F. Other: 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Comments: That will be hard to allocate if large projects – new schools take

majority of t s. It’s not possible to cate cost of a new school over time when overall need either stays the same or increase. It is ost im ossibl do a gle se f alloc on pe ntages for

suggested different ranking of priorities per system on question #4.

Difficulty allocating single funding between two priority systems. No definite p entag centage of the requirement based

upon total dollars available? However certain circumstances may dictate something different on occasion.

Not enough information to determine percentage More information to determine equate Should be left to the school boards Population growth may decline All the growth needs will not be addressed in the first two years. Should be left to Board of Education to decide. Weighted scale a possibility

he resource allo the

both systems since I

alm p e to sin t o ati rce

erc e. Is the per

ad ly



6. How should funding be granted or approved? Please place a check in the

appropriate box.

Ind. Group

Year by Year 1 0

Multiple ars 17 Ye 5

Other: 1 0

omment Must look lon term; c prehe ive [2]

Long-term planning requires multiple year funding with annual modification as changes occur.

Based on a previously approved multi-year plan Multiple year funding is vital for appropriate and most cost effective

funding of ea syste Year by year rs – with

long term strategic plan Must commit to total funding of project, but draw funds as needed

over time du desig ctio Using a project cash analysis Projects are expensive and can’t be built piecemeal Based on strategic needs and operational needs of both systems

not

C

s: g- om ns

Annual allocations for multi-year plans

ch – without long-term strategic plan;

m. Multiple yea

ring n and constru n

Hard plan if Commitment for total funding? Boards determine priorities/not a state.

Project can’t be built piecemeal. Long range planning Fund annu ally with previously approved multi-year plan.



7. What level of funding do you believe should be considered to address Memphis City

and Shelby County school districts? Please place a check in the appropriate box.

Ind. Group

$250 m 0 1

$500 m 8 2

$750 m 4 0

$1.0 billion 1 2

Other: 4 1

C m

to be needed. rks during the course

8. What qual s and Shelby Cou y apply.

Ind. Group

ents: Whatever is needed.

om

Fund what is considered by the NACInitially allocated over 3 years with b ench maof the program measuring use of resources and overall operational impacts Over what period of time? My answer [$500m] assumes approximately 5 years.

Need more information Based on assessment/date driven Whatever is needed Over a period of say 3-5 years

itie ies do you believe are needed in Memphis City of school facilitnt school districts? Check all that

Facilities teducation, 5 tha incorporate physical

art, and music 18

Facilities in good condition [safe, dry & healthy] 19 5

Facilities equivalent to enrollment needs 17 5

Facilities that provide adequate space to meet program requirements 19 5

Facilities that are available for community use 16 5

Facilities that incorporate good quality maintenance practices 19 5

Other: See comments on next page. 2 0



Comments: Other: State of the art facilities that are built anticipating a life cycle that is

reasonable gi n reasonab expe of functional/technical obsolescence.

Other: The stu Memp and S lby County and their future employers deserve the best foundation possible for learning and success.

Actually, facilitie date growth

Problem with equivalent based on long-term demographic data Cost effective co Should be some available community use Maybe not this li Facilities should exceed enrollment needs. Joint use of facil ost spa , positive educational impact.

. What ot sug estions would you consider in order to prioritize capital projects?

Change in Private d

completed Cooperativ Future u This work r round basis – must be inclusive of NAC

and sta Realist ll , but it is not – feedback from

school i Get fee a VAC system energy savings

schedule Future educational programs

10. range planning?

years (including inflation rates)? What are grams/fa es? How are we going to plan

ies, as acted by annexations, possible special school districts or consolidation, need to be answered for long-range

trongly engage the siness community. nge planning to the community?

litan school planning attract c ns for their excellent academic,

l, and emotional educational abilities. districts

cifications Detailed space capacity and educational program analysis of each building

ve le ctations

dents of his he

s should slightly exceed enrollment needs to accommo

nstruction

mited

ities for m ces 9 her ideas or g

s schedules could reduce the need for more schools. [2] en owment funds; grants – private or government; bond issue to fund

5 year plan e and multi-disciplinary facilities

ed cation programs must be done on a yea

ff of both systems. ica y money available must be knownma ntenance, energy savings db ck from construction industry, H

Dual priorities $ need to be known for forward planning School scheduling changes: tri-semester block

What other ideas or suggestion would you consider for long-

What will educatio n cost in 5-10the new trends in educational profo

cilitir funding?

Variables regarding school boundar imp

planning. We must find a way to s bu How do we sell the results of long-ra Metropo Building a school system that will

cultural, physicaitize

Master education plan for both Master set of educational spe



5 to 10 year demographic study

ent projections for each school

5 to 10 year enrollm Master facilities plan – 25 year


during the past thirty years, the programs in a public

Documents