Author: PUSD

12/12/18 – H1 Facilities Bond Program Update

Posted on by PUSD

The District remains on target with key milestones in the Measure H1 facilities bond program, and a progress report follows.

  • Budget Development
  • Increased Construction Costs
  • Beyond the STEAM and Theater Projects: Witter Field & More
  • Closure of Alan Harvey Theater and Relocation Planning
  • Relocation of the College & Career Center
  • Relocation of Shipping & Receiving
  • Community Updates

Budget Development

District staff and members of the District’s Facilities Steering Committee are reviewing subcontractor bids and exploring a range of options to reduce construction costs for the STEAM and theater projects, and will continue to do so for several more weeks.  These options include

possible changes to “means and methods” and materials to reduce cost without cutting scope, and possible reductions in scope.  Ultimately, the District and its general contractor, Overaa Construction, will negotiate a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) for these projects.

Staff is planning to present the project budgets and GMP to the Board on January 23. Budget development is taking longer than expected. Nonetheless, the District is still on schedule to start demolition of Alan Harvey Theater this Spring and construction of the new STEAM building this Summer.

Increased Construction Costs

The budgets for the STEAM and theater projects will be significantly higher than originally estimated by the District and its independent cost estimators.  This is due to several factors: extraordinary inflation and market conditions; changes in project scope mandated by the State; and changes in project scope elected by the District.

The primary reason for the increased cost is inflation.  The preliminary theater budget was developed in early 2016, based on “comparable” theater projects in the area that were underway or completed in 2014 and 2015.  Those “comps” do not reflect the current surge in costs of construction materials and labor. Please refer to the attached letter from the Fremont Unified School District, dated November 27, 2018, discussing this surge and its effect on the FUSD bond program.

To a lesser extent, the increased costs relate to increases in project scope.  The 2016 comps did not include some of the structural elements required by the State for school facilities in close proximity to the Hayward Fault.  Also, the District added complex systems to achieve “zero-net-energy” buildings, and a drama classroom and meeting room in the theater building. The Facilities Steering Committee discussed these scope increases and determined that they are necessary to: meet community goals concerning sustainability and conservation; support the performing arts programs; and protect the theater from the undue wear and tear of daily use as a classroom.  Specifically, the Committee concluded that failing to incorporate state-of-the-art energy efficient systems and the additional theater space would be short-sighted, because it would fail to meet current and future program needs, and because it would result in higher operating, maintenance, and replacement costs over time.

Beyond the STEAM and Theater Projects: Witter Field & More

Because construction costs have increased dramatically, it is unclear whether, after the STEAM and new theater are completed, there will be bond money remaining to complete other aspects of the District’s Facilities Master Plan (FMP).

Other projects the District hoped to advance or complete in this first $66 million phase of FMP implementation include:

  • Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment (FFE) for the new STEAM and Theater buildings
  • Witter Field Improvements
  • Classroom Climate Control (now partially completed)
  • PHS Quad Improvements
  • 20s Building Modernization to Convert Labs to General Education Classrooms
  • 20s and 30s Building FFE
  • Campus Security Improvements (now partially completed)
  • Facilities to Support Extended-Day Kindergarten

After establishing the GMP for the STEAM and theater projects, the District will decide how to use the remaining bond funds to accomplish or advance as many of these projects as possible.  The cost information for each of these projects, too, will need to be developed before the District will know what is achievable in this first phase.

The Witter Field project includes turf and track replacement, installation of a new drainage system, and pathway modification for greater accessibility.  The District has undertaken all steps necessary to prepare for the project, including:  site surveys and analysis; engineering and plan development; application for a permit; relocation planning for athletics and graduations; and development of a Request for Qualifications/Proposals for field contractors.  Nonetheless, the District is waiting to determine the cost of the STEAM and theater projects before deciding whether to proceed with the Witter project this year or defer it for at least one year. The District expects to make this decision in January or February.

Closure of Alan Harvey Theater and Relocation Planning

The District expects to begin demolition of Alan Harvey Theater this Spring, and the estimated schedule follows:

2019
March Closure of Alan Harvey Theater (after the Spring play),
Interior Salvage and Abatement Work Begins
April (Spring Break) Demolition of Alan Harvey Theater Begins
June Construction of STEAM Building Begins
2020
June Demolition of the 10s Building, Construction of New Theater Begins
August Completion and Opening of the STEAM Building
2021
Fall Completion and Opening of the New Alan Harvey Theater

During the time the theater is closed, from March 2019 through the Fall of 2021, the District will relocate drama classes on or near the high school campus.  Possible off-campus options include Ellen Driscoll Theater, the Piedmont Middle School Multi-Purpose Room, and the City’s Veterans Hall. The relocation plans will be finalized in February.

Also, the District will relocate rehearsals and performances in Piedmont or nearby Oakland.  The Spring plays will be performed in Ellen Driscoll Theater. The District is actively looking for additional performance venues — for concerts, musicals, dance shows, the bird calling contest, and other performances — that are welcoming to all and meet the following criteria:

  • Total capacity of at least 650 and ideally 800.
  • Stage capacity of at least 150, so students can sing as a group.
  • Fully accessible to individuals with disabilities.
  • With appropriate space for a piano, drum set, bass, and other instruments as needed.
  • Risers.
  • Excellent acoustics.
  • Access no later than 4:00 pm and continuing until at least 9:30 pm on the day of the concert/performance.
  • Access for at least one rehearsal on a day other than the day of the concert/performance.
  • Reasonably close to Piedmont and served by public transportation.
  • Rental fees not to exceed $1,500.00 per day.

If you have suggestions about possible venues, please contact ppalmer@piedmont.k12.ca.us or tculbert@piedmont.k12.ca.us

Relocation of the College & Career Center

As the District prepares to close Alan Harvey Theater this Spring, it is making plans for the near-term and permanent relocation of school programs.  This has opened up an opportunity for the College & Career Center to relocate into the Piedmont High School Counseling Office. This move will improve communication and coordination between C&CC Director Kristen Hansen and the PHS academic counselors and, more importantly, make it possible for PHS to better serve students.  (Ms. Hansen will continue to work with MHS counselor Stefanie Manalo-LeClair to support MHS students and families.)

The PHS Counseling Office, currently in the PHS 10s building, has a conference room that will be converted into a temporary College & Career Center.  The Center will occupy that room starting in January and continuing through the end of the 2019-20 school year. At the end of that year, when the 10s building is vacated and demolished, the combined PHS Counseling Office and College & Career Center will move to a new, permanent location.  Parent volunteers will continue to support the Center with scheduling and other work that can be done offsite.

Another significant change is that the Center’s collection of college and career materials will move into an alcove in the Library in the 30s building.  This move will make the materials more accessible for students, and students will be able to borrow these materials in the same way they borrow Library books.

The office space currently occupied by the College & Career Center in the 20s building will become the temporary home to the Piedmont Adult School’s administrative office.  The PAS office is currently housed in the basement of Alan Harvey Theater and must be relocated during construction of the new STEAM and theater buildings. Students and families may have questions about how locating the PAS office in a classroom building may affect campus life and campus security.  Please be assured that there are few visitors to the PAS office during the school day. Those who do visit the PAS office during the school day — typically to enroll in evening or weekend classes — will follow the same security protocols that are in place at all school sites.

Relocation of Shipping & Receiving

The District needs to permanently relocate its Shipping & Receiving department, which is currently housed in the basement of Alan Harvey Theater, starting in March 2019.

The City of Piedmont has agreed to allow the District to use the City’s Corporation Yard behind Coaches Field to receive “large deliveries,” at least for the next 18 months.  The District will install a storage portable and a small office portable at the Corp Yard, and rent a small pickup truck to shuttle materials from there to the Magnolia Campus.  This will reduce the large vehicle traffic on Magnolia significantly. Also, the District had identified an alternative location in nearby Oakland that would have cost $60,000 per year to lease, so the no-fee agreement with the City to use the Corp Yard is especially good news.

Community Updates

The following posters, featuring architectural renderings and timeline information about the Measure H1 Bond Program, are now on display on the Magnolia Campus (near Alan Harvey Theater marquee), at each elementary school, in the District Office, and at the PEF office:

RECOMMENDATION: REVIEW AND DISCUSSION

Review and discuss the Measure H1 program updates.

H1 Facilities Bond Program Update

Posted on by PUSD

PIEDMONT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM

TO: Board of Education
FROM: Randall Booker, Superintendent
Pete Palmer, Measure H1 Program Manager
DATE: September 26, 2018
RE:  H1 FACILITIES BOND PROGRAM UPDATE

SUPPORT INFORMATION

The District is on target with key milestones in the Measure H1 facilities bond program.  This update includes a progress report and an overview of the next steps.

Timeline and Milestones

The District has completed the designs and construction documents for the new STEAM and theater buildings and submitted these to the State for review and approval.  These designs reflect input from the District’s science, art, computer science, and performing arts teachers and students, and incorporate the District’s energy conservation goals.  Also, the District has submitted to the State plans to improve the drainage at Witter Field. Anticipating that the State will issue permits for these projects by March 2019, the preliminary schedule follows:

2019
March Closure of Alan Harvey Theater (after the Spring play),
Interior Salvage and Abatement Work Begins
March Closure of Witter Field (after the high school soccer season),
Drainage Work Begins
April (Spring Break) Demolition of Alan Harvey Theater Begins
June Construction of STEAM Building Begins
Fall Completion and Re-Opening of Witter Field
2020
June Demolition of the 10s Building, Construction of New Theater Begins
August Completion and Opening of the STEAM Building
2021
Fall Completion and Opening of the New Alan Harvey Theater

Please note that it is uncertain precisely when the State will complete its review and issue permits for these projects.  Given the scope of these projects and current review times, it is reasonable to estimate issuance of the Witter permit by December 2018 and issuance of the STEAM and theater permits by March 2019.  The preliminary schedule is based on this estimate. The actual schedule will depend on this and other factors such as general and subcontractor availability, lead-times for procurement of materials, and unforeseen conditions concerning weather, high water tables, and soil conditions.

Summer 2018 Projects  

This summer, the District completed a range of H1-funded projects, including:

  • High School Computer Lab.  The District converted two small offices near the PHS Library into one computer classroom with 34 workstations, to help meet rising demand for computer classes without waiting until the STEAM building is completed.  This room is a prototype for the computer labs in the new STEAM building, and will help the District refine plans for furniture and finishes in the new labs.This lab includes: a new electrical subpanel that eliminate the need for individual workstation surge protectors; ground concrete flooring; acoustical wall panels and ceiling; laser projectors; white boards; new flexible furniture with built-in power and data; and high/low work stations.  The District also installed a new climate control system in this lab and infrastructure to expand the system to the remainder of the Library building in the future (ultimately replacing steam radiators and an antiquated boiler). A photo of the completed lab follows.
  • Elementary School Ventilation and Climate Control.  The District installed ventilation and climate control equipment in five classrooms at each the elementary schools, to prevent classroom overheating and improve the learning environment.  These 15 classrooms were selected based on data concerning classroom temperatures over the last school year. This work included infrastructure that will make it simple, quick, and cost-efficient to install these systems in the remaining classrooms in the future.       
  • Middle School Safety and Security.  The District replaced PMS’ old wood doors with new ADA-compliant doors with vision lites and electronic locks.   
  • Preservation and Re-Use of Underground Utilities.  To prepare for construction of the new STEAM and theater buildings, the District surveyed underground utilities at the high school campus (including sanitary sewer, storm sewer, domestic water, fire sprinkler water, irrigation water, and natural gas lines).  This survey will enable the District to preserve and reuse these utilities and avoid spending time and money to re-install this infrastructure.
  • Relocation of Trash and Recycling.  Also to prepare for construction of the new STEAM and theater buildings, the District relocated the PHS trash and recycling area from the Magnolia side of Alan Harvey Theater to the PE Hill side of PMS.   

Each of these projects advanced key objectives in the District’s Facilities Master Plan.    

Spring 2019 Closure of Alan Harvey Theater

Closing Alan Harvey Theater during the Spring of 2019, rather than waiting until the end of the school year, will help keep the STEAM project on schedule for completion before the 2020-21 school year.  Nonetheless, there may be questions about how starting work during the school year may affect students, staff, and campus flow.

Once the theater is closed, and until the new STEAM building is completed, the theater site will be cordoned off from the rest of the campus.  Initially, fixtures, lighting systems, and other features that can be reused in the new theater will be “salvaged” and removed. Next, a specialized contractor will abate any hazardous materials inside the theater (for example, removing old thermostats and light fixtures that contain mercury).  This salvage and abatement will be inside the existing theater building and will proceed largely unnoticed by students and staff.

The District plans to demolish the theater over Spring break when there are no students or staff on campus.  If demolition cannot be completed during that week, the District will develop a schedule for the remaining demolition, to minimize the campus impact to the greatest extent possible.  

During the time the theater is closed, the District will relocate drama classes on or near the high school campus.  Possible options include the Dance PE gym and Ellen Driscoll Theater. The District is also considering options to relocate performances in Piedmont or nearby Oakland, and possible venues include Ellen Driscoll Theater, Holy Names College, Mills College, and Presbyterian United Church.

Spring 2019 Closure of Witter Field

The District is preparing to make improvements to Witter Field that include turf and track replacement, installation of a new drainage system, and pathway modification for greater accessibility.  The principal concerns when scheduling these improvements are: (1) weather, as rain can add time and cost; and (2) minimizing the disruption to school and community programs. For these reasons, the work will be done to the extent possible during the late spring and summer, when the chances of rain are low and (during June and July) when there are no students on campus.  

The work is expected to start in March, as soon as possible after the end of the high school soccer season.  As school will start mid-August, every effort will be made to complete the work in early August. This closure of Witter will impact PE classes as well as lacrosse, track, and summer football.  The District has tentative agreements in place to relocate lacrosse to Laney College and track to Merritt College, and is working on relocation of summer football.

Also, the District has reserved the Paramount Theater for the 2019 PHS and PMS graduations.  After considering a range of possible venues, the Paramount was selected based on available dates, proximity to Piedmont, cost, access to public transportation, and availability of parking.

STEAM Building Update

HKIT, the District’s architects, provided the following renderings of the new STEAM building, showing the street elevation, lobby, a hallway, and a science lab:

HKIT submitted the completed plans to the State for review is July 2018, so the project remains on schedule.  The District and its contractor, Overaa Construction, will negotiate a “Guaranteed Maximum Price” (GMP) for the project by the end of 2018.  

New Alan Harvey Theater Update

HKIT provided the following renderings of the new Alan Harvey Theater, showing the street elevation, lobby, stage, seating area, drama classroom, and rear elevation:

HKIT submitted the theater plans to the State in September 2018, two months after the original target date, but the overall project remains on schedule.  The delay was due in part to supplemental site testing and analysis required by California’s State Geologist. As with the STEAM building project, the District and Overaa will negotiate a GMP for the new theater project by the end of 2018.  

Community Updates

This and other Measure H1 community updates are archived at www.measureh1.org (this website).

In addition to presenting periodic written updates to the Board and community, and posting these on the Measure H1 website, the District will provide:

  • Periodic updates to school families and staff through Infinite Campus.
  • Periodic presentations and updates to the Piedmont City Council.
  • Periodic presentations and updates to each of the parent clubs.
  • Information, images, and site tours to local news media.
  • Posters featuring timeline information and architectural renderings, to be displayed at each school site.   
  • A community-wide mailer in early 2019, prior to the closure of Alan Harvey Theater and Witter Field, with information about these projects.  
  • A public service announcement to KCOM in early 2019, with project descriptions, images, and timeline information.

Suggestions about other means to disseminate information about the Measure H1 bond program can be addressed to me at any time at rbooker@piedmont.k12.ca.us.

RECOMMENDATION: REVIEW AND DISCUSSION

Review and discuss the Measure H1 program updates.    

Press Release: May 6, 2008

Posted on by PUSD

At its April 30, 2008 meeting, the Board of Education approved two contracts, one with Webcor Builders and a second with ATI Architects and Engineers, to initiate the schematic design process for the rebuilding of Havens Elementary School at a gross maximum price.We would like to take this opportunity to extend a huge thanks to Mark Becker and Andy Ball, for their ingenuity, commitment, and “can do” spirit.Their generosity combined with a construction delivery model that supports the team approach to quality construction, is a major gift to our school system and to our community.

 

With Appreciation,

June Monach
Board of Education President  

Constance Hubbard

Superintendent of Schools

Letter to the Piedmont Community, March 2008

Posted on by PUSD

Dear Citizens:

So much has happened since Piedmont voters approved Measure E back in March 2006.  We are writing to provide you with a Progress Report and to invite you to attend an important event:

  Community Meeting on Saturday, March 29, 2008 from 9:00 a.m.- noon

 where citizens can learn about the proposed school projects and overall budget, and have an opportunity to provide input on a proposal being considered by the Board to rebuild Havens Elementary School.


PROGRESS

Since Measure E’s passage, the District’s goal was to implement the program using a comprehensive, thoughtful, and transparent process with many opportunities for community involvement and feedback along the way.Although this process takes time, we believe it was necessary to build community understanding and support for a quality multi-year construction program.Here is what we have accomplished to-date:

  • Took immediate action to reduce risks associated with the most serious seismic issues by vacating classrooms at Havens, removing the tile roof at the PHS Quad building, and minimizing use of the Student Center.
  • Assembled a team of qualified professionals, including engineers, architects, peer reviewers, and program and project managers to work with the District’s management team.
  • Involved many dedicated volunteers from the community, including the Steering Committee, Technical Advisory Committee, and Citizens Oversight Committee.
  • Issued the first series of bonds totaling $15 million to fund the necessary planning, engineering and architectural work.
  • Completed all of the engineering studies necessary to identify and measure the seismic safety risks as well as the required accessibility, fire and life safety issues in all of our school buildings. 
  • Categorized the buildings into three groups (1=red, 2=yellow and 3=green) and prioritized them from buildings with the greatest deficiencies to those with the least.
  • Developed conceptual designs and rough cost estimates for all of the target projects.
  • Researched the available state funding and initiated the process required to obtain these funds. 
  • Established a web site, issued newsletters, and organized community meetings to inform and involve the public.

 

NEXT PHASE

Now we are ready to tackle the next phase of the program, where a detailed design schematic, budget, construction and phasing plan must be developed for each project.  The Board plans to approach program implementation as follows:

Address the Group 1 Buildings (PHS, Havens, and Maintenance Facility) & seek State funding

Consultants have identified buildings with the greatest structural and accessibility deficiencies at these sites.To address these buildings, the District will:

  • Develop design schematics, refined budget, and phasing plan to repair PHS Quad Building and Student Center.
  • Develop design schematics to rebuild the maintenance facility, critical to ongoing maintenance of the district’s facilities and recovery efforts in the event of a major earthquake.
  •  Havens Elementary School
    The school has two vacated glass classroom wings with serious structural deficiencies, 1930’s construction likely to suffer significant damage in a major quake, and significant accessibility deficiencies throughout.

    Design developer Mark Becker, Former Board Member Jim Nybakken, and President of Webcor Builders, Andy Ball, have approached the District with a proposal to rebuild the school at a guaranteed maximum price, anticipated to be much lower than previous estimates to rebuild the school.

    The Board has asked staff to assess the viability of pursuing this proposal which would require that the District enter into a special ‘lease/lease back’ agreement with any interested developer for a guaranteed maximum price. 

    The School Board is seriously considering this proposal, which in addition to addressing the seismic and accessibility issues on the campus, provides many other benefits to the community. 

 

Repair Group 2 Buildings (on the Beach and Wildwood campuses) & seek State funding

Consultants predict that the 1930’s construction on these campuses is likely to suffer significant damage in a major earthquake.The District will:

  • Develop design schematics, refined budget, and phasing plan to repair the 1930’s construction at Beach School.
  • Develop design schematics, refined budget, and phasing plan to repair the 1930’s construction at Wildwood School.


Reduce fire & life safety, and falling hazard risks at all schools

  • Implement non-structural seismic work at all of the school buildings, reducing or removing falling hazard risks from classrooms, hallways, offices, and other public spaces.
  • Upgrade fire alarm systems on all campuses, including integration of PMS and PHS system.

 

COMMUNITY MEETING

 We hope you will be able to join us at the Community Meeting on Saturday, March 29, 2008 from 9:00 am noon at the Ellen Driscoll Auditorium.  The meeting will be facilitated by consultant, Gina Bartlett, from the Center for Collaborative Policy.The goals for this meeting include:

  • Conduct a ‘Walk Through’ of the Havens campus
  • Provide an overview of progress made to-date on the Measure E bond program, including a summary of the overall program budget based on current rough cost estimates of target projects.
  • Present the Becker Design for the replacement of Havens.
  • Answer questions, issues and concerns you may have about the program.
  • Solicit community input on the Havens rebuild proposal and overall program plan. 

Please RSVP to Beverly Feusier, Superintendent Hubbard’s Administrative Assistant at 510-594-2614 or bfeusier@piedmont.k12.ca.us.  If you cannot attend, feel free to provide your input at input@pusdbond.org.  Many thanks for your ongoing support of the Piedmont public school system.

 

Sincerely,

Constance Hubbard
Superintendent of Schools 

June Monach
President, Board of Education 

 

 

P.S.EXCITING NEWS!   We just posted a NEW District Newsletter to the PUSD website.The communication is intended to inform the community about our efforts to maintain and improve upon quality educational opportunities in our schools.Go to: www.piedmont.k12.ca.us and let us know what you think.In addition, if you would like to receive updates on the bond program, go to:  www.pusdbond.org and sign up for E-News.

Cost / Budget / Design Guidelines

Posted on by PUSD

TO:                  Board of Education
FROM:           Constance Hubbard, Superintendent
SUBJECT:     REVIEW OF DISCUSSION GUIDELINES FOR MEASURE E PROJECT DECISIONS                                                              

I.              SUPPORT INFORMATION

The Board began the discussion of the policy and planning issues linked to the decisions required in the Program Plan Development phase of Measure E projects at the September 26, 2007 Board meeting. 

The Project Investigation and Concept Development phase is due to be completed by November 14, 2007.  The Program Plan Development phase is scheduled to begin at a Special Board Meeting scheduled for November 28, 2007 and is expected to go through January/February of 2008.  The Program Plan is the defined scope, sequence and budget for each project that is to be included in the Measure E implementation phase.

The timeline is scheduled to be discussed at each of the Parent Club meetings in October and staff meetings to be scheduled prior to November 14, 2007.  Parents, staff and community members are encouraged to provide direct feedback on the proposed Guidelines for the Project Program Development Plan at the Regular Board meetings scheduled tonight, on October 24, 2007 and November 14, 2007 and through the bond website at: www://pusdbond.org. 

The goal is for the Board to discuss, receive input and to approve Guidelines for the Project Program Development Plan by November 14, 2007.  The approved guidelines will be used in the prioritization process for the adopted Program Plan for Measure E.

Attached is a graphic of the various issues that impact the Program Plan Development and a copy of the information on the issues and recommendations presented to the Board.A summary of the recommendations grouped into two basic categories of Cost/Budget and Design Parameters is also provided.
II.         RECOMMENDATION: REVIEW & DISCUSSION

It is recommended that the Board discuss the issues and recommendations as presented.   The goal is to have the criteria finalized by November 14, 2007.

CH/bf

Attachments

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION OF GUIDELINES FOR MEASURE E

PROJECT DECISIONS

(Presented at Board Meeting of October 10, 2007)

Following is a summary of the recommendations presented to the Board on September 26, 2007 for the guiding criteria to be used in the decision-making process for the Program Plan Development.  The information is grouped into two categories: Cost/Budget considerations and Design Criteria.

Cost/Budget

The project investigation phase includes estimated cost for the implementation of the concepts presented for each project.The funds available from various sources must also be considered in the Program Plan development.  The cost estimate and the funds available are a guide to the decisions about scope and sequence.The budget to be allocated to each project and the overall plan must balance cost and funds available.  The prioritization process includes contingencies as funds are/are not available.  The recommendations presented as they relate to budgeting and costs are:

1.     Budget Measure E funds to each site to address all safety issues related to earthquakes including non-structural deficiencies identified as first priority.

§  Structural seismic

§  Accessibility as required by DSA (Division of the State Architect)

§  Fire and Life safety as required by DSA

§  Address fire alarm systems at all sites

§  Non-structural seismic hazards

2.     Budget State Modernization funds to address infrastructure issues to leverage (supplement) Measure E funds on projects.

§  Develop a prioritized list of program improvements to apply as the schedule for receipt of State funds is confirmed.

§  Use Modernization funds remaining to improve programmatic functions at each school.Consider usability after an earthquake in the structural criteria, design

3.     Address accessibility issues not required by DSA from Measure E, State Modernization and Deferred Maintenance funds.

4.     Include maintenance facilities in final plan to improve ability to react after an earthquake (i.e.do not allow to fall off list of Measure E projects)

Design Criteria

1.     Consider usability after an earthquake in the structural criteria for inclusion in the Program Plan

2.     Address all buildings 50 years or older as if designated as historic sites in the development of the repair options 

3.     Require all designs and materials to consider the requirements for LEEDTM (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) rating system, and CHPS (California High Performing Schools).Incorporate sustainability and ecological impact for now and the future for use and selection of materials

4.     Address infrastructure issues at same time facility is disrupted by required Measure E work

5.     Consider long-term implication for maintenance of facilities

6.     Consider program needs for now and future

7.     Parity of educational program offerings among schools (elementary)

8.     Apply approved facilities standards in selection and use of materials

9.     Apply OPSC (Office of Public School Construction) and District program standards in design of spaces

Project Decision Guidelines

Posted on by PUSD

TO:                  Board of Education
FROM:            Constance Hubbard, Superintendent
SUBJECT:      DISCUSSION OF GUIDELINES FOR MEASURE E PROJECT DECISIONS

 

I.          SUPPORT INFORMATION

Safety of human life is at the core of the inquiry to the District’s facilities and the basis for Measure E.From the initial question about seismic safety of our buildings in 2001 by a group of concerned citizens through the passage of Measure E by the community in 2006, safety has been at the core.Providing a safe environment for all who use the District’s facilities is one component of the fiduciary (i.e.hold in trust) responsibility of the Board of Education.Prudent management of all of the Piedmont Unified School District’s resources is that to which the members of the Board of Education as trustees must be accountable.  The guidelines for decisions in the definition of program and scope of projects for Measure E include the consideration of a spectrum of issues that requires the application of overarching policies. 

This evening, the Board will begin the discussion of the policy and planning issues linked to the decisions required in the Program Plan Development phase of the Measure E projects.  The Superintendent has provided information on the issues and recommendations.  The Board will consider the recommendations and begin discussion on the issues this evening.  The discussion will continue over the next two Board meetings and will allow opportunity for community input.  Discussions on the issues will also be scheduled at the site’s Parent Club meetings in October.The goal is to have defined Guidelines for Project Plan Development by November 14, 2007 for use in the Program Plan Development that begins at the Special Board Meeting scheduled for November 28, 2007.  The Guidelines will serve as the principles by which decisions are made to determine scope and sequence of projects as we go through the prioritization of project components.

Measure E, as stated on the ballot, authorized the District to issue bonds up to a total of $56 million for the purpose of “repair, reconstruct, or replace Piedmont public school buildings to reduce dangers from earthquakes and to meet state and federal seismic safety standards”.  The full text of the measure included the expectation for the improvement of accessibility per the Americans with Disability Act (ADA), and the addressing of safety issues such as non-structural seismic hazards and fire alarm systems.

The process for implementation of Measure E has three phases:

1.    Project Investigation and Concept Development
(completion November 2007)

2.    Program Plan Development – Defining Scope and Sequence
of all Projects (November 28, 2007 – January 2008)

3.    Implementation and Construction (February 2008 – Program completion)

The first phase will be substantially completed by November 2007.The information for all individual projects that have been brought to the Board for review over the past year will be presented together at a Special Board Meeting on November 28, 2007. The presentation will include a summary of all of the information and a draft Program Plan that includes options for project budgets, scope and sequencing.  The public input process is scheduled to go through January 2008.  The goal is to have an approved Program Plan that includes a prioritized list of projects, with scope, sequencing and budget so that the Implementation and Construction phase can begin. 

In anticipation of the Program Plan Development phase that will define the scope and sequence of all of the projects, clear guidelines for evaluating the priorities for each project and the overall program will expedite the decision-making process.The approved Guidelines will help in the communication to the community of the decision making criteria used in the Project Program Development.

Following is a list of issues, discussion of options and impacts and recommendations from the Superintendent.  The recommendations are based on the detailed information received as part of community input, paid consultants, volunteer experts working as advisory groups, and recommendations and input from school staff. 

The goal is for the Board to discuss, receive input, and approve Guidelines for the Project Program Development Plan by November 14, 2007.  The approved guidelines will be used in the prioritization process for the adopted Program Plan for Measure E.

 

ISSUE (1):  Use of Measure E Funds as it applies to “reducing dangers from earthquakes” The language and intent of the Measure E program is open to interpretation. The Board needs to agree on guidelines as to the application of the range of the use of Measure E funds to individual projects and the overall plan.

OPTION 1.a:  Apply fiscally conservative criteria for use of funds for minimum upgrades required to meet the state and federal guidelines for the FEMA definition of “life safe”.

IMPACT:                                                                       

  • Does not consider usability of buildings post earthquake
  • Aesthetics and function may be reduced/impaired
  • State agencies such as Division of the State Architect (DSA) and the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) have requirements that require upgrades not directly linked to life safety FEMA standards
  • May not be best “bang for the buck”, given the disruption and invasiveness of work required. 

OPTION 1.b:  Use Measure E funds on all structures that require seismic work, accessibility and fire life system upgrades and address infrastructure upgrades at the same time.

IMPACT:                                                                       

  • Will allow for consideration of usability of buildings post earthquake
  • Aesthetics and function may be improved
  • Addresses the non-structural hazards
  • Will address requirements of State agencies such as (DSA) and the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC)
  • Program request likely to exceed funds available
  • Increases duration of Program
  • Citizens Oversight Committee (COC) may not agree with scope

 

ISSUE (2):  Use of “matching” Modernization Funds from State.  The District has verified eligibility from the State for modernization funds.  The eligibility and receipt of funds are not synonymous.  The Program Plan Development must include a criteria for the budgeting of eligible funds and options for the timeline for the actual receipt of funds from the State by the District.

OPTION 2.a:  Budget State Modernization funds to supplement (replace) the use of Measure E funds

IMPACT:        

  • May be able to issue less than total bond authorization for lower tax rate for community
  • Must address requirements of State agencies such as (DSA) and the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) and all requirements for receipt of “match”.
  • Preliminary budgets indicate that Measure E projects will exceed the District required match and therefore supplanting is allowable.
  • Does not address any infrastructure improvements (e.g.HVAC systems, technology)
  • Does not address any program improvements
  • Defined projects not dependent on actual receipt of State funds
  • Does not take best advantage of the disruption to the educational program during construction

 

OPTION 2.b:  Budget Modernization funds to supplement (add) the use of Measure E funds

IMPACT:                                                                       

  • Must address requirements of State agencies such as (DSA) and the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) and all requirements for receipt of “match”.Preliminary budgets indicate that Measure E projects will exceed the District required match.  District has discretion as to use Modernization Funds once match is provided.
  • Funds could be used to address non-Measure E needs for infrastructure improvements (e.g.HVAC systems, technology)
  • Provides opportunities to address program improvements
  • Leverages the Measure E funds to address facilities needs
  • Modernization funds not under purview of COC
  • Budgets may exceed realized revenues if State funds are not available

 

RECOMMENDATION (Issues 1 and 2)

Budget Measure E funds to address all safety issues related to earthquakes including non-structural deficiencies identified as first priority.No reduction of programmatic functioning is primary in the addressing of seismic needs.  Use opportunities whenever possible to improve educational program function and flexibility for the future.Budget State Modernization funds to address infrastructure issues to leverage Measure E funds on projects.Develop a prioritized list of program improvements to apply as the schedule for receipt of State funds is confirmed.For example, the addressing of seismic structural issues will require the invasion of wall and roof systems.  Use Modernization funds to insure electrical, heating and technology infrastructure systems are improved.  Use Measure E funds as the primary source for structural improvements.Use Modernization funds remaining to improve programmatic functions at each school.Consider usability after an earthquake in the structural criteria, design and implementation of projects.

ISSUE (3):  Accessibility and Fire and Life Safety Requirements.  There is a broad range to which accessibility and fire and life safety criteria could be addressed.  The Program Plan requires guidelines for the depth and breadth as to how these issues will be addressed in the final plans.

OPTION 3.a:   Address only the minimum requirements of DSA and OPSC

IMPACT:

  • May not include a level that represents respect for all to have access to our  facilities for the educational process and as a community resource
  • May not provide the minimum level of safety for non-structural hazards such as fire
  • May be the most cost effective

 

OPTION 3.b: Address all requirements at all sites

IMPACT:

  • Is cost prohibitive
  • Unlikely can anticipate all needs
  • Existing terrain and structures interfere

 

RECOMMENDATION (Issue 3)

It is likely that the requirements of DSA and OPSC on sites/projects that require major construction will be sufficient to respectfully address accessibility and provide an adequate level of safety. 

The dilemma is for projects that may not require significant construction for seismic improvement that triggers required accessibility and fire life safety upgrades.The District could choose not to include these projects in the overall Program Plan and therefore not be required to address accessibility or the fire and life systems.  It is recommended that all sites have the fire alarm systems upgraded to meet current standards as part of the Measure E projects.  Long term plans to address accessibility issues for sites to be developed and addressed through a combination of Measure E and the Deferred Maintenance program.  It is understood that all accessibility needs cannot be anticipated and/or addressed given the topography of Piedmont.  A plan to improve wherever possible is an important component of the Measure E program and in keeping with the District’s mission to serve all students.

 

ISSUE (4):  Historic/Aesthetic Requirements in Design.   The Board of Education recognizes their responsibility to the community to protect the historically significant aesthetic assets of the school facilities. 

OPTION 4.a:   Cost as the primary driver in design decisions and implementation

IMPACT:                                                                       

  • Features of school buildings such as interior finishes in the auditoriums, murals in schools, tile roofs vary in historical significance
  • Cost differential may/may not be significant
  • Environmental quality review requirements (CEQA) may require review of historic designation that could delay projects.

 

OPTION 4.b:   Preserve aesthetic features of all buildings as is

IMPACT:                                                                       

  • Have an obligation to community to protect assets including features of school buildings that have aesthetic value such as interior finishes in the auditoriums, murals in schools, tile roofs.The obligation includes application of best fiscal practices
  • Not all features of current structures are historically significant
  • Aesthetics value is not obviously, uniformly definable
  • Cost differential may/may not be significant
  • Address environmental quality review requirements (CEQA) from beginning of all projects.

 

RECOMMENDATION (Issue 4)

Address all buildings 50 years or older as if designated as historic sites in the development of the repair options.  Evaluate the cost differential of maintaining the historic features versus not.  It is important to note that some of the issues such as the tile roof systems once disrupted may be no more expensive to repair to the same aesthetics.  Seek repair options that maintain murals and internal features in the auditoriums.Preliminary investigations indicate that the cost differential to maintain historic features is not significant.  In the design development, when a specific aspect of a project is identified to have economically disparate impacts, consultants are to bring to the Steering Committee for a recommendation and to the Board for decision.

 

ISSUE (5):  Application of Sustainability/Green in Design.  The fiduciary responsibility of the Board includes attention to the effect on inhabitants of structures from the materials used, long term environmental impacts and fiscally responsible maintenance and energy use. 

OPTION 5.a:  Require all designs to meet the requirement for LEEDTM (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) rating system, and California High Performing Schools (CHPS)

IMPACT:

  • Requirements address sustainability in choice of materials and use of energy
  • Provides more ecologically friendly materials/use
  • Certification process often expensive and time-consuming
  • Could delay projects
  • May impact cost
  • May increase eligibility for State grants

 

OPTION 5.b:   Do not consider sustainability issues in design and choice of materials.

IMPACT:

  • Not responsible to environment, community and students of future
  • May impact cost
  • May affect long-term cost for energy, replacement and maintenance

 

RECOMMENDATION (Issue 5)

Require all designs and materials to consider the requirements for LEEDTM and CHPS.Incorporate sustainability and ecological impact for now and the future for use and selection of materials.  Consider long-term implication for maintenance of facilities.  Require all steps for certification only if improves eligibility for increased funding.  Evaluate cost impact over long term in decision making process for specific issues.

 

ISSUE (6):  Consideration of Program Improvements Flexibility for facilities use for the current and future programmatic needs is a Board responsibility. Addressing the safety issues of the facilities will require the significant disruption of the educational process.  Guidelines for the extent to which program improvement considerations are applied in the prioritization process will be critical in the development of the overall Program Plan Development.

OPTION 6.a:   Program improvements are not the purpose of Measure E and should not be considered

IMPACT:

  • Not responsible to community and students of future to ignore
  • Fiscal implications not clear
  • Some programmatic improvements such as accessibility required to be addressed

 

OPTION 6.b:   Consider program improvements only for those structures that will be disrupted by significant structural work as part of Measure E

IMPACT:

  • May affect parity for opportunities for students across the District
  • May allow for addressing flexibility and future needs as doing work

 

OPTION 6.c:  Consider program improvements for all sites in Program Plan Development

IMPACT:

  • Addresses parity for educational opportunities for all students across the District
  • Addresses flexibility and future needs for all sites
  • Funding of program improvements may not be allowable as part of Measure E and/or State Modernization fund
  • Needs are in excess of currently available funds
  • Cannot anticipate all future needs

 

RECOMMENDATION (Issue 6)

Given the level of invasive work that is required to address the seismic issues, it is incumbent on the design team to consider program needs.Solving as many issues at once as possible is in keeping with Board goals.  It makes sense to address programmatic and infrastructure needs at the same time students, staff and the facility is being disrupted.   For example, a project may require the entire interior wall finishes in a classroom to be removed.  It makes good fiscal sense to make sure that systems within the walls (e.g.insulation, electrical, technology) are addressed before the walls are replaced and that the wall system that is installed meets the current and future when it can be anticipated; teaching needs (e.g.replacement of blackboards with “smart” boards, installation of projector mounts with the ceiling replacement).

It is recommended that the Board direct staff to define programmatic needs and to develop strategies to address issues of parity in conjunction with the Measure E Program Plan.  This may include alternative methods of delivery of programs, additional teaching resources and professional development opportunities for staff.

In the same vein as having facilities standards for facilities, we are committed to educational standards for the teaching environment.  This includes making sure that all students in the District have comparable opportunities as they progress through the grades.  This becomes particularly important at the elementary level because of having three sites.  Parity in program offerings as they are impacted by facilities for all sites must be considered in the Program Development.  Educational interests can be addressed in multiple ways that include resources other than those under the purview of Measure E. 

 

ISSUE (7):  Consideration of Use of Facilities Following an Earthquake Measure E is intended to make our buildings safer in the event of an earthquake.Imbedded in this notion is the housing of students in a safe environment after an earthquake.

OPTION 7.a:   Address only those projects that are identified as deficient by current standards to meet the life safe definition by FEMA standards

IMPACT:

  • Some sites may not meet the technical definition of “life safe” but are unlikely to collapse and likely to allow for safe exiting after an earthquake.
  • Some sites meet the technical definition of life safe and are unlikely to be usable after an earthquake. 

OPTION 7.b:  In addition to the FEMA standards, evaluate buildings for likely use after an earthquake.  Use professional judgment and provide recommendations for likely performance during and after an earthquake (e.g.red, yellow, and green tagging by FEMA)

IMPACT:

  • Fiscal implications – increase in use of funds now versus cost of repair after an earthquake
  • May affect sequencing of projects from original grouping


RECOMMENDATION (Issue 7)

Recovery after an earthquake is an integral part of the overall Program Plan Development.  The cost of strengthening prior to an earthquake is likely to be significantly less than repair after an earthquake.  The unknown is how the structure will actually behave and what damages are sustained.  The strict application of the ASCE standards may not accomplish the intent of Measure E in a fiscally responsible manner.The professional consultants’ recommendations as part of the Program Plan Development will include likely use after an earthquake for each project.  The priority order of projects may need to be altered to improve the District’s ability to attend to after an earthquake.  The maintenance facility, for example, is in the third category to be addressed.  In the Program Plan, it may make sense to address it sooner than later to improve our ability to attend to the needs of the sites after an earthquake.

SUMMARY

The agreement and communication on the guiding criteria for decision-making by the Board before the November 28, 2007 Board Meeting that begins the decision making phase of the Program Plan Development will aid in the prioritization process.With clarity on the over-arching issues, decisions about the details of the scope and sequence of projects can proceed from a common starting point. 

The goal is, by November 14, 2007, to have approved Guidelines for Project and Program Plan Development that can be applied as we begin the next phase for Measure E implementation on November 28, 2007.  It is anticipated that clear guidelines will expedite the overall Project Plan so the Implementation and Construction phase can begin as soon as possible.Inflation and market conditions significantly impact the budgeting of projects.  Delays can also significantly impact the receipt of funds from the State.Once the Project Program Plan is developed, issues of cash flow and bond issuance can be addressed.

 

II.      RECOMMENDATION:  INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION

It is recommended that the Board discuss the issues and recommendations as presented.  There will be opportunity for further discussion and input from the public at the next Board meeting and additional Board meetings, as appropriate.  The recommendations will be posted on the website at www.pusdbond.org .  The goal is to have the criteria finalized by November 14, 2007.

September 2007 Newsletter

Posted on by PUSD
  In this Issue:
   “¢ Where We Are…Updates on Summer Projects
   “¢ Citizens’ Oversight Committee Report
   “¢ Bond Financial Activity
   “¢ Next Steps: Program Plan Development Phase
   “¢ Next School Board Meeting
The Piedmont Unified School District continues to make progress on the Bond Program.Each school is at a different stage in the Project Investigation & Concept Development Phase of the program.In this newsletter we review what’s been accomplished to date and at what cost, followed by what’s next …
Where We Are…Updates on Summer Projects
At Havens, there is more play and recess space for kids.The Kindergarten play structure adjacent to the Main Building was modified and re- opened for use.Additional recess and play space was created by removing benches and resurfacing the black top area.The glass wings of the Main Building remain vacant.Portables installed last August continue to be used for grades 3-5.murakami/Nelson is developing enhanced concept designs and cost estimates for the Hybrid Option.
Learn more about:
Havens Concept Designs & Cost Estimates for Hybrid Option
Oct 24, 2007 Regular Board Mtg / 7 pm / City Hall Council Chambers   

At Piedmont High School, as an interim safety measure, a lighter temporary roof was installed over the Quad Building, which contains the library and #30’s classrooms.This work was done so the building could continue to be used by students and staff during the planning process.The project was completed early this summer at a cost of approximately $50,000.Access to the Student Center continues to be limited.Investigation and Concept Design work continued over the summer in both seismic priority and non-priority buildings.

Learn more about:
PHS Design Concepts & Cost Estimates for all buildings
Nov 14, 2007 Regular Board Mtg / 7 pm / City Hall Council Chambers

 

At Beach, murakami/Nelson is developing Concept Design Options and Cost Estimates for review by the Board in late October.Structural deficiencies identified at the school are very similar to those identified in the 1930’s construction at Havens.

Learn more about:
Beach Design Concepts & Cost Estimates
Oct 24, 2007 Regular Board Mtg / 7 pm / City Hall Council Chambers

At Wildwood, work is taking more time because a complete set of drawings are unavailable from the original 1930’s construction.A more thorough investigation is being conducted in order to develop these drawings.Similar to Beach, structural deficiencies identified at the school are very similar to those identified in the 1930’s construction at Havens.

 

Learn more about:
Wildwood Investigative Report
Oct 10, 2007 Regular Board Mtg / 7 pm / City Hall Council Chambers

Wildwood Preliminary Concepts & Preliminary Cost Estimates
Nov 14, 2007 Regular Board Mtg / 7 pm / City Hall Council Chambers

 

At the Maintenance Facility, located between the Morrison Gym and Witter Field, an investigation by the structural engineers and architects for seismic, fire/life safety, and accessibility deficiencies has been conducted.

Learn more about:
Maintenance Facility Investigation Report, Concept Design & Cost Estimates
Oct 24, 2007 Regular Board Mtg / 7 pm / City Hall Council Chambers

 

At Piedmont Middle School, fire/life safety, non- structural hazards, and accessibility deficiencies have been investigated and were reported to the Board in August.

Learn more about:
PMS Design Concepts & Cost Estimates
Nov 14, 2007 Regular Board Mtg / 7 pm / City Hall Council Chambers

 

Citizens’ Oversight Committee Report
The 2007 Annual Report to the Community was presented to the Board on June 27.The report included financial activity from inception through May 14, 2007.All bond program expenditures were viewed to be appropriate as authorized under the bond measure approved by voters in March 2006.

Click here to see the Citizens’ Oversight Committee Report 

 

Bond Financial Activity
Out of approximately $15 million in revenue generated from the first bond issuance, approximately $2.7 million has been spent through 6/30/07.As noted earlier, each school site is at a slightly different stage in the Project Investigation and Concept Development Phase.The highest priority facilities, Havens and PHS, are farthest along and therefore have incurred the highest costs.Due to the absence of drawings, Wildwood is in the earliest stage of this phase.

Click here to see the latest Financial Report 

 

Next Steps: Program Plan Development Phase
Late November marks the beginning of the Program Plan Development Phase of the Bond Program.While input will be solicited from the various committees and public in helping to define the scope for each school facility project, ultimately the Board of Education is responsible for deciding how the projects will come together into a comprehensive Program Plan.Before developing a draft plan, consultants will look to the Board for a set of specific guidelines to use in developing the Program Implementation Plan.Superintendent Constance Hubbard will present these recommended guidelines for the Board’s consideration on September 26.This information will be presented to the various bond committees, parent and community groups for input and discussed more fully by the Board beginning on October 10. 

On November 28, a special board meeting will be convened, where CPM and murakami/Nelson will present a Draft Program Plan that integrates feedback received on the individual Project Concept Design Options and incorporates recommended guidelines provided by the Board to use in developing project scopes and phasing, and project and program budgets and financing.

 

Next School Board Meeting
The next regular meeting of the School Board will take place on September 26th at 7:00 pm in City Hall Council Chambers.The public is invited and encouraged to attend this meeting and provide input.

June 2007 Newsletter

Posted on by PUSD

In this Issue:

   “¢ Master Planning Overview
   “¢ Havens Update
   “¢ PHS Update
   “¢ Beach Update
   “¢ State Matching Funds
   “¢ Civic Center Master Planning Meetings
   “¢ Next School Board Meeting

Piedmont Unified School District continues to pursue a multi-pronged strategy in developing a plan to address the seismic strengthening needs of its facilities.This newsletter outlines the most up to date information available on the district’s progress.

 

Master Planning Overview
The Program Management Team is responsible for developing a Master Plan to address the seismic safety and related accessibility and fire & life safety deficiencies of the district’s facilities.The plan will include the priorities, scope and budget for the overall program and for each school site as well as an estimated timeline for the completion of each project.Although the process is not entirely sequential, it can be thought of as happening in four major stages.

1.Evaluation & Analysis: Architects murakami/Nelson, working with Structural Engineer Ron Gallagher, are performing a detailed assessment of each school site to identify seismic deficiencies and related accessibility and fire & life safety issues.This evaluation includes the Tier 2 quantitative engineering analysis of the structural issues at each site.In some instances, when significant structural risks have been identified, near-term mitigation steps may be recommended to reduce the life safety risk until a permanent solution is completed.Evaluation & Analysis has been completed for the Havens, PHS, and Beach sites and the remaining sites are expected to be completed by this Fall.

2.Concept Design & Cost Estimation: murakami/Nelson are developing one or more design concepts to address the seismic, accessibility and fire & life safety issues at each site, as well as rough cost estimates for each design option.This stage of the planning process has been completed for Havens.Design concepts and cost estimates for the remaining sites are expected to be completed by this Fall.

3.Cost/Benefit Analysis: The program management team, led by Capital Program Management, will develop a cost benefit analysis for each project, which includes an assessment of whether the potential scope of work, when considered in the aggregate (all projects together), can be accomplished within the total $56 million bond program authorization.Although this process is ongoing, an analysis of the overall program cost and priorities will not be completed until after concept design options and cost estimates have been reviewed for all of the sites.

4.Project & Program Implementation: Once the Master Plan and project plans are finalized and approved by the Board of Education, the Program Management Team, working with the Division of the State Architect, will manage the implementation of each project and the overall program plan through detailed Design / Construction Documents / Construction.

Public input will continue to take place at major milestones throughout the planning process – at scheduled public engagement and regular board meetings, in meetings of the Steering Committee and Technical Advisory Committee, and via e-mail to the PUSD Bond Program website.

 

Havens Update
The architects and engineers have completed the Evaluation, Design Concepts and Cost Estimates.According to structural engineer, Ron Gallagher, “All three buildings do not meet the agreed upon ASCE 31 performance standards for life safety.The already vacated classroom wings of the main building have the most serious deficiencies.” According to architect John Nelson, “Given the topographic constraints of the site, what has evolved over time is a maze of accessibility with significant barriers along most routes.”Three retrofit options have been developed with preliminary cost estimates ranging from $9.5 to $23.2 million.In addition, a very rough estimate for a fourth option to rebuild the school has been developed with a range of $35 to $41.8 million.The options and cost estimates are currently being reviewed and vetted by working committees of the bond program and will continue to be refined in the future.A Havens Community Meeting was held on May 30 to solicit additional public input on each of these options.A recap of the meeting will be available on the website soon. 

Click here to see the Havens Evaluation & Analysis

 

PHS Update
The Evaluation & Analysis of the high school campus is complete.The structural analysis identified that the most serious deficiencies exist in the Quad Building, comprised of five different structures built between the 1930’s and late 1990’s.The clay tile roof on the oldest part of this building poses the greatest life safety risk.The Tier 2 analysis substantiated the preliminary analysis on the Student Center building.In the event of a major earthquake the building would likely suffer significant damage, however not be a collapse hazard.Different from the preliminary analysis, the Tier 2 findings on the Alan Harvey Theatre indicate that, “The theatre generally meets ASCE 31 life safety criteria, except that some of the connections of the roof framing to the large concrete columns are overstressed.”Near-term Mitigation: murakami/Nelson, Inc.recommended that, “If the two older wings of the Quad building continue to be used before being strengthened, then the heavy roof tile should be removed and replaced with a light-weight temporary roof as an interim safety measure.” The Board authorized for this work to be completed this summer.The scope of the project involves removing tile from a portion of the quad (30’s) building and installing a temporary roof using a standard composition roof shingle.The color of the temporary roof will approximate a match to the existing roof tiles, and the ORIGINAL clay tiles will be retained and stored.The projected cost of the temporary roof installation is less than $100,000. 

The Board has authorized murakami/Nelson to continue working on the campus this summer, and targeted October 2007 for the Concept Design and Cost Estimation work to be complete.

Click here to see the PHS Evaluation & Analysis

 

Beach Update
The Evaluation & Analysis phase at the school is complete.The structural deficiencies identified at the elementary school facility are similar to the deficiencies of the 1930’s construction at Havens, with one exception.According to structural engineer, Ron Gallagher, “Many of the shear walls in the building are significantly overstressed.While we do not believe the building is a collapse hazard, it appears it would suffer significant damage” due in large part to the heavy tile roof and many window and door openings in the exterior walls.Addressing the structural deficiencies is likely to trigger some level of accessibility and life- safety upgrades.No Near-term Mitigation measures were recommended.Click here to see the Beach Evaluation & Analysis

 

State Matching Funds
The District has applied to the Office of Public School Construction for State matching funds.With the passage of Proposition 1D in November 2007, $7.35 billion more in State funds will be available for K-12 public school construction modernization projects.Eligibility is based on the age of buildings, student population, and past receipt of state modernization funds.Based on these criteria, the District is eligible for over $11.7 million in state modernization funds.Access to the funds is on a first come first serve basis.Application for State funds can be made only after project plans have been approved by the Division of the State Architect.Estimates of State Modernization Funding by Site

 

Civic Center Master Planning Meetings
A special joint session of the City Council and Board of Education was held on April 30, to receive an update from Fisher Friedman Associates regarding the City’s Civic Center Master Plan Project and murakami/Nelson architects regarding the School District’s Bond Program.Because school facilities are located within our town center, proposed modifications to these facilities may impact the Civic Center Master Plan development proposals.After hearing the presentations, the Council and School Board heard from the public and considered how best to maximize the efficient use of community resources in addressing the two renovation efforts.The Board asked for public feedback as to: 1) repair or rebuild preferences regarding Havens School; 2) whether Ellen Driscoll Auditorium should be preserved given its architectural heritage; 3) entrance to Havens School and location of drop-off zones; and 4) building accessibility.A second joint session is scheduled for June 11 when the City Council and School Board will continue their discussion of opportunities for joint action in the Civic Center.The meeting will take place at 7:30 pm in City Hall Council Chambers.

 

Next School Board Meeting
The next regular meeting of the School Board will take place on June 13 at 7:00 pm in City Hall Council Chambers.The public is invited and encouraged to attend this meeting and provide input.

PUSD Bond Program Update: May 14, 2007

Posted on by PUSD

PUSD Bond Program Update – Save the Dates May 23 and May 30 

  • The assessment and evaluation of priority buildings on the Havens Elementary School campus is now complete.
  • Three design concept options have been developed to repair identified structural, accessibility, and fire/life safety deficiencies in the buildings.Cost estimates have been developed for each of the options, including estimates for a fourth option to rebuild the school.

The next two opportunities for citizens to provide feedback to the district on the options developed for Havens School are:

  • Wednesday, May 23, 2007 as part of a regular Board Meeting in City Hall Council Chambers.The board meeting begins at 7:00 pm and lasts several hours depending upon the number of items on the board’s agenda.
  • Wednesday, May 30, 2007 from 7:00 – 9:00 pm in the Ellen Driscoll Auditorium.This meeting will be dedicated to discussing the Havens project.Superintendent Constance Hubbard, School Board Members, Havens Principal, Tery Susman, murakami/Nelson President John Nelson, and Capital Program Management Principal, Mike Wasserman will be on hand to hear input and answer questions.

Public input also may be given via e-mail to: input@pusdbond.org

Stay tuned for additional ‘News and Updates’ by going to: www.pusdbond.org or calling (510) 594-2614.