posted by Joe Polk at 12:30 AM /
The Mt. Lebanon School District will embark on initial planning for a new high school next month by forming an Educational Specifications Committee and holding the first public planning workshop.
The purpose of the committee will be to develop a facilities guideline and space requirements for the high school project. During the past year, the school board has discussed the need for either a new or renovated high school. No cost figure has been mentioned.
Link: www.postgazette.com/pg/06264/723528-55.stm
The purpose of the committee will be to develop a facilities guideline and space requirements for the high school project. During the past year, the school board has discussed the need for either a new or renovated high school. No cost figure has been mentioned.
Link: www.postgazette.com/pg/06264/723528-55.stm
11 Comments:
Wouldn't it be cheaper to renovate the old high school? Besides, if they built a new school, what are they going to do with the massive structure already standing?
Churn.... Baby Churn.
What did they do with Three Rivers Stadium? What will they do with the Civic Arena? What did they do with the Syria Mosque?
The old building, (guess), would be a 'parking lot.'
Duhh...
Better question... is Heinz Field really that much better?
Personally I preferred 3 Rivers for football. PNC Park on the other hand is great.
Is the new Convention Center really bringing in more conventions than the old one?
Do the acoustics at Heinz Hall compared with those at the old Syria Mosque?
New does not guarantee better!
So Mark, basically they want to spend a lot of money on a new building (and the land it would be built upon) or spend significantly less money on renovating the existing building (and not having to worry about buying the land). I think its a pretty easy decision...
Matt,
There are good arguments for renovating the current high school, but I don't think that cost is one of them. Remodeling old structures is frequently more expensive than building new, and in this case, I think that the School District learned with the elementary schools just how difficult it is to do large scale renovations on these old buildings. Some of that difficulty was self-imposed (poor choice of contractors, poor oversight during construction), and some of it was external (some practices were dictated by state law), but the reality is that when you open up an old building like this, you never know exactly what you'll find. That adds up.
Mike
Just a couple of thoughts...
A new building isn't going to be finished during the summer break.
Exactly, how are they going to handle the transition to a new facilty if its proposed location is the present H.S. parking lot?
Using current auguments that the high school now has excess capacity, logistically it seems rennovating floor-by-floor or by section would create the least disruption.
Also, this project has been debated for a long time and I'm bewildered why the board continues to pursue a new pool when the high school project hasn't been finalized.
Why design a pool location/bldg. before knowing exactly where the next H.S. will be?
Isn't it more cost effective to construct one bldg. rather than two?
High School Project Timeline:
October 2004: PG prints $50-80 million cost for high school.
November 2004: President Hoffman confirms figures.
December 2004: New President Walton calls figures speculative saying $35-$100 million is cost.
At this point the board has four cost points. Do they have four options presented to them in executive session?
Janurary 2005: Past President Hoffman says the board needs curriculum specs (really specs after costs????)
October 2005: President Walton says we have to talk to our staff.
It's nice that she thought of that after four cost figures were floated for the building a year earlier. Dr. J. is appointed to head the staff committee.
June/July 2006: DeJung is hired as a high school consultant for over $70,000.
September 2006: Dr. Wilson announces a facilities committee for all community members to determine space needs for the school. Why would community members be needed to determine space needs if we have staff and a consultant? I remember the community planning of our swimming pool needs.
Dr. Wilson announces he will retire at the end of the school year and Dr. J. becomes principal of Bethel Park High School a full two years after the initial cost estimates were printed in the PG.
For all those who are interested in the high school rennovation or new construction there is a website that provides a lot of useful information. It has articles not only on financially analyzing rennovation vs. new construction. But how to proceed once the decision has been made.
The site is www.asumag.com by American School and University magazine.
Go to articles by topic, then to construction/facilities.
There are also topics covering roofing, design, flooring, technology etc.
Anyone who attended either session have any opinions on how it went? I was there for both and I saw two distinct atmospheres between the morning and evening sessions....
Eight years on the Mt. Lebanon Commission years ago and similar roles more recently bring up two points that hopefully will be kept in mind relative to the discussion about the high school.
A project of this type tends to take on a life of its own. It is relatively easy for any board or similar group to embrace a concept and discard or ignore alternative solutions.
A more important issue for the board to consider is what the real objective of a renovated or new building is. The end result should be a better education for students, not a status symbol.
An athlete using a weight machine in a $10 million facility becomes no better than another athlete using the same equipment in a 70-year old structure. What determines the athletic improvement is how diligently he uses the equipment, not how pretty the weight room is.
Education at its most basic level consists of two components, a willing student and a dedicated teacher. This is not to say that better tools are not relevant or even necessary at times, but a new building does not determine the difference between a good or bad education.
By considering first what the true objective is could significantly alter what is done to achieve the desired result. In the long run, physical facilities may be a very insignificant element in the quest for ways to help students compete in a dramatically changing market for skills and knowledge.
Good post "Eight Years..."
Dr. Wilson just announced that Mt. Leb was one of 5 districts in the state to be rated "outperforming" by Standard & Poors, an achievement garnered for the past 4 years.
The high school has been a blue ribbon school 3 times in the last few years.
Business Times rated our school best in W. PA last year.
We always at the top in test scores.
So why all the focus on future visions. Yes, there are always areas that can be improved, updated etc., but I believe this Dejong meeting is a smoke screen to hide discussing any renovation of the current bldg.
Open classrooms were a disaster in the 70s & 80s, but for some reason they keep being pushed as innovative. I'd like to see some numbers, corresponding test scores etc.
See the Oct. post to see some more good questions.
Post a Comment
<< Home