greenbush middle river school district referendum ... · greenbush middle river school district...

GREENBUSH MIDDLE RIVER SCHOOL DISTRICT REFERENDUM

INFORMATIONAL MEETING


RECENT HISTORY OF FACILITY PLANNING


TAX IMPLICATIONS

TAX IMPLICATIONS


For Accurate Tax Impacts visit the Tax Calculator at:http://levyinfo.com/LevyInfo/ISD2683_2015.php


BUILDING SPACE PROGRAM



COMMUNITY | RELATIONSHIPS | DESIGN | CONSERVATION | VALUES

• Total Teaching Stations Existing = 53Total Square-Footage Existing = 121,825

•Total Teaching Stations New = 34Total Non-Programmable Space = 26,692 SFTotal Square-Footage = 93,422 SF

•Student Capacity:19 Core Classrooms x 20 per class = 38019 Core classrooms x 25 per class = 475




• NON PROGRAMMED SQUARE FOOTAGE –The purpose of this square footage is to allow School Districts to tailor their facilities to their specific needs, beyond what the basic MDE guidelines require.

• The example floorplan in the Review and Comment Document represents basic MDE standards.

• The Space Program in the Review and Comment Document represents a fuller understanding of the GMR proposed facility.




• SOME SPACE PROGRAM SPECIFICS–

Learning spaces / Teaching Stations – any space where an instructor can effectively meet with a class sized group. (different than a core classroom)• 53 teaching stations to 34 teaching stations – right-sizing to

MDE standards for GMR enrollment size.• Administration recommends utilizing Non-Programmed SF for

up to 2 additional Flex Classrooms.





Technology Space• Centralized or Distributed: A District Decision.• If dedicated computer labs are desired, then incorporation into

the Media Center / LRC is recommended.





Gymnasium / Phys Ed. Space• Main Performance Gym• 900 to 1,100 spectator seating• Divisible into two cross-courts

Auxiliary Gymnasium / Phys Ed. Space• 80 to 150 spectator seating• Divisible into two cross-courts





Auditorium• Multi-purpose is the base plan, dedicated space is the Alternate

Option





Wrestling & Weight Training• Weight Training is included in the space program• Wrestling is one of the specific elements that the District will

add from the Non-Programmed SF.

FACS – it is included in the Space Program (4-6 kitchen stations)





Special Education:• More of the Non Programmed Square Footage will be

designated for this function.• MDE Requirements are minimal. Each District is responsible for

the Education of All, but means and methods are up to each District.


PROJECT CONSTRUCTION BUDGET

PROJECT CONSTRUCTION BUDGET



Estimated expenditures for major portions of the project:

• Construction costs: $20,825,000• Soft costs (15% of construction costs): $3,123,750• Contingency (3.4% of construction costs): $650,350• Land purchase if req’d (40 acres): $80,000

TOTAL PROJECT COSTS: TOTAL PROJECT COSTS: TOTAL PROJECT COSTS: TOTAL PROJECT COSTS: $24,679,100.00$24,679,100.00$24,679,100.00$24,679,100.00TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL BOND REFERENDUM BOND REFERENDUM BOND REFERENDUM BOND REFERENDUM COSTS: COSTS: COSTS: COSTS: $25,000,000.00$25,000,000.00$25,000,000.00$25,000,000.00


POTENTIAL OPERATIONAL SAVINGS

POTENTIAL OPERATIONAL SAVINGS

• GREENBUSH MIDDLE RIVER SCHOOL DISTRICT REFERENDUM

• POTENTIAL SAVINGS

Approximate annual energy savings due to new, smaller and more efficient facility: $112,000.Approximate potential operational savings from the current budget: $190,000. This number is comprised of the following examples:

• Administration• Certified Staffing• Non-Certified Staffing• Busing Total estimated annual savings: $302,000.

NOTE: Potential Savings means that the District has the option to reduce these costs over time, by separate NOTE: Potential Savings means that the District has the option to reduce these costs over time, by separate NOTE: Potential Savings means that the District has the option to reduce these costs over time, by separate NOTE: Potential Savings means that the District has the option to reduce these costs over time, by separate action. These savings are not automatic, nor do they need to beaction. These savings are not automatic, nor do they need to beaction. These savings are not automatic, nor do they need to beaction. These savings are not automatic, nor do they need to be. More potential savings than those listed here . More potential savings than those listed here . More potential savings than those listed here . More potential savings than those listed here have been studied, but further reduction in costs and staffing have not been discussed or considered by the have been studied, but further reduction in costs and staffing have not been discussed or considered by the have been studied, but further reduction in costs and staffing have not been discussed or considered by the have been studied, but further reduction in costs and staffing have not been discussed or considered by the Board at this time. Cost savings listed above indicates the easiest and most direct savings to be realized with Board at this time. Cost savings listed above indicates the easiest and most direct savings to be realized with Board at this time. Cost savings listed above indicates the easiest and most direct savings to be realized with Board at this time. Cost savings listed above indicates the easiest and most direct savings to be realized with minimal board actions.minimal board actions.minimal board actions.minimal board actions.

CURRENT COSTS

2013-2014 operating budget, plus the inclusion of energy costs averaged over a couple seasons: $5,550,949.Of that, approximately $245,000 was allocated to facility energy costs, which equates to $1.91/SF.The District plans to aspire to a design goal of $1.40/SF for energy costs.


POTENTIAL TIMELINE

POTENTIAL PROJECT TIMELINE

•••• Nov 3Nov 3Nov 3Nov 3rdrdrdrd ---- VoteVoteVoteVote


•••• November November November November –––– December, 2015: Schematic Design & Final Site SelectionDecember, 2015: Schematic Design & Final Site SelectionDecember, 2015: Schematic Design & Final Site SelectionDecember, 2015: Schematic Design & Final Site Selection


•••• January January January January ---- February, 2015: Design DevelopmentFebruary, 2015: Design DevelopmentFebruary, 2015: Design DevelopmentFebruary, 2015: Design Development

•••• March March March March ---- May, 2016: Construction DocumentsMay, 2016: Construction DocumentsMay, 2016: Construction DocumentsMay, 2016: Construction Documents

•••• May, 2016 May, 2016 May, 2016 May, 2016 –––– August, 2017: ConstructionAugust, 2017: ConstructionAugust, 2017: ConstructionAugust, 2017: Construction

•••• Fall, 2017: Occupy School Fall, 2017: Occupy School Fall, 2017: Occupy School Fall, 2017: Occupy School –––– IDEAL CONST. CONDITIONSIDEAL CONST. CONDITIONSIDEAL CONST. CONDITIONSIDEAL CONST. CONDITIONS

•••• December, 2017: Occupy School December, 2017: Occupy School December, 2017: Occupy School December, 2017: Occupy School –––– POOR CONST. CONDITIONSPOOR CONST. CONDITIONSPOOR CONST. CONDITIONSPOOR CONST. CONDITIONS