ARCHITECTURE + ENGINEERING, LLP ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS CONNECTED Facility Master Plan Town Hall Meeting Meeting 1 May 22 nd , 2014 Working together with parents and the community Providing a high quality education Creating a safe learning environment Ensuring each student will be a contributing citizen in an ever-changing diverse and global society
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
• Subcommittee #3: Facilities | Parents | Community
Where do we want to go from here?• Potential Learning Models• Potential Grade Configurations• Alternative Delivery Methods• Prepare for Growth• Plan for 21st Century Schools
Subcommittee #1 Recap: Reviewed pros/cons of RUSD current grade
configuration Assessment indicates RUSD is below “efficient”
capacity, but might exceed capacity in 5-10 years Discussed Academies, enrollment rates and
grade-configuration options• Option A – Reconfigure to K-5, New 6-8, Combine Ripon ES into Ripon HS • Option B – Retain K-8 Configuration, Combine Ripon ES into Ripon HS • Option C – Reconfigure Ripona and Weston to K-5, Retain K-8 at Colony Oak
and Park View and add Athletics, Ripon ES becomes 6-8 Academy, Expand Ripon HS
• Option D – Reconfigure to K-5, Convert Ripon HS to 6-8, Combine Ripon ES to converted 6-8, New HS on Ag Land
• Option E – Reconfigure to K-6, Convert Park View ES to 7-8, Combine Ripon ES into Ripon HS
A B C D EColony Oak Replacement X X X X XColony Oak Add Athletic Facilities XNew 6-7-8 School New 6-7-8 School XNew 9-12 School on Ag Land New 9-12 School XPark View Add Athletic Facilities XPark View Convert to 7-8 XRipon ES Convert to 6-7-8 Academy XRipon ES/Ripon HS Combine Ripon ES with Ripon HS X X XRipon ES/Ripon HS Combine and Convert to Middle School XRipona Significant Modernization X X X X XWeston Replacement X X X X X
Subcommittee #2 Recap:Reviewed pros/cons of RUSD funding mechanisms:
• State School Facility Program• Federal Funding• General Obligation Bonds• Mello-Roos (Community Facilities Districts)• Parcel Taxes• Developer Fees/Mitigation Agreements• Joint Use Opportunities
Determined that Funding Strategies will be determined by:• Condition of existing facilities• District growth/enrollment trends• District-determined Developer Fee structures
Moderate growth projections in respect to State “efficiency standards”
Discussed grade configuration options• Less of a need as originally thought – possibly push in the 5-10 year mark
Review of Facility Assessments• Most facilities have signage/ADA/Path-of-Travel concerns• Ripona shows most critical infrastructure needs within next 0-5 years regardless of
growth
Administration/Transportation/M&O concerns• Administration building was ‘temporary construction’ 20+ years ago• Transportation is an issue with the District (“Bustodians”)• M&O could have room for efficiency improvements if transportation was not an
• Begin process of locating new Administration Building siteo Consider Multi-Use siteso Consider future transportation demands
• Begin Cost/Benefit Analysis of privatizing transportationo Consider ‘lease’ arrangements with MUSDo Consider possibly sharing Multi-Use site with Administration
• Utilize Facilities Master Plan as a O&M and IT guidebook• Begin process of identifying and adopting identical O&M processes between
Subcommittee #1 Reviewed pros/cons of RUSD current grade
configuration Assessment indicates RUSD is below “efficient”
capacity, but might exceed capacity in 5-10 years Discussed Academies, enrollment rates and
grade-configuration options• Option A – Reconfigure to K-5, New 6-8, Combine Ripon ES into Ripon HS • Option B – Retain K-8 Configuration, Combine Ripon ES into Ripon HS • Option C – Reconfigure Ripona and Weston to K-5, Retain K-8 at Colony Oak
and Park View and add Athletics, Ripon ES becomes 6-8 Academy, Expand Ripon HS
• Option D – Reconfigure to K-5, Convert Ripon HS to 6-8, Combine Ripon ES to converted 6-8, New HS on Ag Land
• Option E – Reconfigure to K-6, Convert Park View ES to 7-8, Combine Ripon ES into Ripon HS
Subcommittee #2Reviewed pros/cons of RUSD funding mechanisms:
• State School Facility Program• Federal Funding• General Obligation Bonds• Mello-Roos (Community Facilities Districts)• Parcel Taxes• Developer Fees/Mitigation Agreements• Joint Use Opportunities
Determined that Funding Strategies will be determined by:• Condition of existing facilities• District growth/enrollment trends• District-determined Developer Fee structures
Moderate growth projections in respect to State “efficiency standards”
Discussed grade configuration options• Less of a need as originally thought – possibly push in the 5-10 year mark
Review of Facility Assessments• Most facilities have signage/ADA/Path-of-Travel concerns• Ripona shows most critical infrastructure needs within next 0-5 years regardless of
growth
Administration/Transportation/M&O concerns• Administration building was ‘temporary construction’ 20+ years ago• Transportation is an issue with the District (“Bustodians”)• M&O could have room for efficiency improvements if transportation was not an