posted by Mike Madison at 8:40 AM /
Updated at 9:50 am:
See additional posts on last night's School Board meeting and decision by
My In Box this morning featured the following:
How much money are we talking about?
How much money is the District going to invest in upgrading the educational program, aside from the buildings?
Is a referendum in the works?
And why on earth is the High School Principal making this announcement?
See additional posts on last night's School Board meeting and decision by
- Director Josephine Posti
- Director James Fraasch
- Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article
- The Pittsburgh Channel article
My In Box this morning featured the following:
Dear parents and students,So:
At the Board of School Directors' meeting last evening, the following resolution was passed by a vote of 7-2: RESOLVED, that the Board directs the architects to proceed to the schematic phase of the High School Project based on the assumption that a
portion of the High School will be renovated, and a portion will be new construction (known as Option 2 but subject to changes in that plan as directed by the District as the project proceeds).
I would like to thank the community-at-large for their involvement in the process leading up to this decision, and thank the Board of School Directors for considering the varying perspectives before reaching a decision that they felt is best in terms
of building design options and fiscal responsibility.
Ronald P. Davis, EdD
Principal
How much money are we talking about?
How much money is the District going to invest in upgrading the educational program, aside from the buildings?
Is a referendum in the works?
And why on earth is the High School Principal making this announcement?
Labels: high school renovation
13 Comments:
I attended last night's meeting and I spoke at the meeting. I have attended more open meetings in the last year than most school board members. Of course I have not attended any closed-door meetings. Ms. Rose should apologize for the way she ridiculed a fellow school board member last night. It's not the way elected officials should behave in public.
Mr. Silhol should figure out where the flag is located upon his arrival. This simple routine will prevent him from spinning around with his hand on his heart. It might also prevent an unfortunate yet humorous fall from taking place.
On to the questions:
How much money are we talking about?
I think we are staring down the barrel of $100 million plus. The district simply cannot afford this expenditure.
How much money is the District going to invest in upgrading the educational program, aside from the buildings?
It's a sure bet the district will spend less money on the educational program than it does now.
Is a referendum in the works?
Not sure. The supporting line-item details were discussed in closed-door sessions.
And why on earth is the High School Principal making this announcement?
I have no idea. You'd have to ask him yourself. I never met the guy.
At the risk of public ridicule, I'll admit that I was watching the Pitt game while others were doing the good work of this community. Thank you! Therefore, can someone answer a few questions that I can only assume were raised/discussed last night:
1. With the understanding that anything over $110 million would require a vote, did the Board ever task the architects with trying to come in under that amount when this whole process started? If so, was that Option already reviewed and rejected by the Board?
2. Was any direction given to the architect last night that a sub-$110 million design should be their goal?
3. Is it likely that we can get everything we "need" (and I'm not sure how that's defined) for less than $110 million, thus making a vote inevitable? I'd like to think the architect and the construction manager have a pretty good educated opinion on this point already based on their past experiences, knowledge of the industry and what they know about this project in particular.
4. Is there a time line for their new design?
5. Is a complete rebuild (Option 1) offcially off the table?
Thanks
I was totally confused after reading the principal's email which was in my mailbox this morning. What a scary thought that there are others with the same reaction as mine. What IS the timeline? And do the students continue to wear their coats in class because there is no heat while this political football is passed around?
Elaine Gillen
From the district website:
"Plans should be ready in 6-9 weeks."
Mr. Silhol clearly stated last night that this was not a vote about going to referendum or not, but simply choosing what the board saw as the best option at this time. The architects are now tasked with drawing schematics (detailed plans), which will give everyone a more accurate idea of actual costs, which may or may not be under the referendum amount. The board then still has options to "tweak" the plan as they see fit before signing off on it.
-Sheryl Cohen
Last night I had prepared some notes on both Option 2 and Option 3 I had not made up my mind on my recommendation because I still had many unanswered questions about each option.
There were both good and dumb things about both options. But Mr. Silhol said two words in his opening remarks that made me put away my notes. When Mr. Silhol said these two magic words, I realized at this point I could welcome continued development of either option. The magic words: Six Weeks.
They are asking the architects to bring schematics and more refined plans back in Six Weeks. This fresh look will hopefully be comprised of more good than we have seen and less dumb. If not, then back to the drawing board.
The other point I tried to make, and probably not very well, is that it is time to put someone in charge of the project.
Someone that is intimate with ALL the details (Programming, Construction, Financing, Costs, etc…).
Someone that can authoritatively answer questions from the Administration, the Board or the Public.
Someone that does not hedge, or say -- I can put that in your packet.
Someone that can make decisions, or effectively and timely articulate decision options and implications to the decision makers.
Someone that can make the thing hang together.
It cannot be a committee. It cannot be someone that does this as a secondary responsibility. It can be a part-time responsibility, but it has to carry equal weight with other duties. And it has to be someone whose time commitment can grow commensurate with the project needs.
First, let me offer a giant disclaimer. I am not suggesting in any way, shape or form that we should compare or debate the quality of the educational experience (either past, present or future) between Penn Hills and Mt. Lebanon. That is NOT the debate that I am looking for nor my reason for pointing out the attached article from today's PG:
http://www.postgazette.com/pg/09049/949876-100.stm
However, I would be curious to know how much different their construction is from the the proposals that we have received. The $80 million difference in cost is dramatic. Is their project that much smaller or different than ours? Are they using straw or are we using platinum? Is our enrollment twice the size of Penn Hills? Are our costs driven up that much by the fact that we are working on the site of the existing building and would require that much more in site work?
Without debating what goes on inside the building, I'm just curious how a school district just across town can build a brand new high school for less than half the price that we've been quoted.
I believe Penn Hills holds just 10 - 12th grade and ~1450 students.
Mary Beth Sklar
According to the article, the new building will house grades 9-12 and be 20,000 square feet larger than the current building.
David F.-
I don't think we have to go as far as Penn Hills for an example.
Check out Bethel Park's plan. They are available at www.bphs.org, look on left for article titled BPHS Renovation Public Information Packet.
Their HS project for 1,900 students is estimated at $83,000,000 to a maximum of $98,000,000.
Yet, Mt. Lebanon is looking at $136,000,000 for approx. 1,700 students-mmmmm?
Dean Spahr
Oh, by the way- the architect's plan from Carngie-Mellon sounded very intriguing. He suggest we can keep our historic bldgs., include just about everything everybody wants, including a new pool and- AND it can be done for under $110,000,000!
I for one want to hear more about his concept.
Dean Spahr
Why does Dean Sphar want to hear from an architect we didn't hire and was not even interviewed by the Board? Remely and Silhol, who we did elect, had a plan that was $20,000,000 cheaper and was never vetted by the construction manager or the architect.
It seems to me too many folks are being cavalier with $20,000,000.
Thanks a Latte,
John Ewing
John Ewing-
To answer your question, the CMU architect it appears has considerable expertise and credentials!
I don't know him, didn't see his plan, but it did seem well thought out as he presented it.
I actually, and you can ask Dan Remely, support the Remely/Silhol plan. It is a pretty good compromise between doing nothing and spending $150 million on a new school.
But at this point, can you tell me exactly what that plan entails? I haven't seen any schematics, comprehensive drawings or models?
Since we have only very vague plans in Ops: 2, 2A-B-C or 2.99, why not see what the CMU expert can contribute. Didn't hear him say he was charging anything for it! He did say he planned for traffic routing, the pool, fine arts etc.
If the Silhol/Remely plan is so complete that any input would escalate cost, then the train has already left the station!
You infer I'm being cavalier with $20,000,000! Seems to me Dan said his plan depending on what ala carte options the community wanted could run as high as $110,000,000. Besides the vote at Monday night's meeting for Option 2 as I understand it authorized Celli to design up to $136,000,000!!!!
I'm still curious as to why any of the plans are higher than Bethel's $83,000,000 plan.
Dean Spahr
Mr. Ewing-
According to the HS principal: "At the Board of School Directors' meeting last evening, the following resolution was passed by a vote of 7-2: RESOLVED, that the Board directs the architects to proceed to the schematic phase of the High School Project based on the assumption that a portion of the High School will be renovated, and a portion will be new construction (known as Option 2 but subject to changes in that plan as directed by the District as the project proceeds)."
According to papers handed out at community forums the Total Cost Estimate for OPTION 2 is $138.3M! (page 11)
Substantially higher than Dan's Option 2,2A/B or the CMU architects proposal 2.999!
Dean Spahr
Dean Spahr
Post a Comment
<< Home