posted by Joe Polk at 12:40 AM /
The Mt. Lebanon School District intends to open a second front in its battle over zoning deficiencies associated with the proposed $113.3 million high school renovation.
On June 22, the district could make its case before Mt. Lebanon's Planning Board and give a formal presentation regarding the construction project.
Read more: www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_683087.html
On June 22, the district could make its case before Mt. Lebanon's Planning Board and give a formal presentation regarding the construction project.
Read more: www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_683087.html
Labels: high school renovation, planning board, school district, zoning
19 Comments:
In the Trib article it states: "Mr. Papke addresses critics who contend that the renovations don't equate to increased test scores."
According to this article in eschoolnews the critics just might be right. Below are some paragraphs from the article which can be read in full at: www.eschoolnews.com/2009/06/01/school-of-the-future-lessons-in-failure.
School of the Future: Lessons in failure
How Microsoft's and Philadelphia's innovative school became an example of what not to do
By Meris Stansbury, Associate Editor
Top News, eClassroom News
Jun 1st, 2009
"Philadelphia’s School of the Future (SOF) was touted as a high school that would revolutionize education: It would teach at-risk students critical 21st-century skills needed for college and the work force by emphasizing project-based learning, technology, and community involvement. But three years, three superintendents, four principals, and countless problems later, experts at a May 28 panel discussion hosted by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) agreed: The Microsoft-inspired project has been a failure so far."
Its this paragraph that I consider most pertinent!
"We naively thought, I guess, that by providing a beautiful building and great resources, these things would automatically yield change. They didn’t," said Jan Biros, associate vice president for instructional technology support and campus outreach at Drexel University and a former member of the SOF Curriculum Planning Committee."
Its seems there's no guarantee that a renovation will automatically improve student learning. If Mr. Papke can provide evidence to the contrary, I'd be interested in reading it.
Dean Spahr
Folks in favor of the school project often mention the anticipated sweet reimbursement from the state as a key component in moving forward with the big school project.
However, it should be noted that just yesterday the state budget deficit for fiscal year 2009-10 reached $1.23 billion (with a B). Meanwhile, CNN is reporting that Harrisburg is drowning in debt. Moody's has declared that city's debt to be below investment grade or . . . . junk. Yes, our state capital is seriously considering filing for bankruptcy.
Notably, both the state and Harrisburg cite property tax defaults and declining receipts in personal income taxes as significant reasons for their problems. "It is becoming more and more clear that in these very difficult economic times, Pennsylvania will have to again tighten an already-cinched belt, hold the line on spending and put off items we simply can't afford," said Sen. Jake Corman, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee.
How does that reimbursement look now?
But hey, we live in freaking Camelot, right? Bad stuff never happens here! Let's just keep borrowing, building, taxing, spending and suing ourselves without any regard for what's going on around us.
David Franklin:
Though I can't say for sure this is true, it appears to be one more worry.
LEED v3: Report Energy Usage or Risk Decertification | NorthWest Hub
(www.northwesthub.org/LEED 3-3-decertification.24)
"According to this report 50% of LEED buildings fail to meet their projections and 25% actually function worse than projected!"
Apparently new rules have been written or are in the process concerning LEED reimbursements. The way I read it if a project fails to live up to expectations LEED reimbursements could fail to materialize too.
Dean Spahr
Saw the news report on Harrisburg. Greece has a we better rating. The Commonwealth is stretched so thin and it will do what one does in times like this....cut cut cut. I love (sarcasm) the concept of the SB: spend money we don't have tossed with an afterthought of oh and let's form a committee to see where we can cut other things.
Marjie Crist
Check your mail boxes. It is one thing to read about it in the newspaper. The tax increase hits home today! Lebocitizens.com has a tab called Tax Relief. There is some information to help senior citizens or anyone who doesn't have the Homestead Exclusion on their property. Every little bit helps. How DOES the school board sleep at night? At some point, do they ever ask themselves, "How can so many people have this wrong?"
Elaine Gillen
@Dean>I hope that this will serve as clarification for you with regards to your post concerning words that you attributed to me:Thank you for this opportunity to address you this evening. I would like to express my support for the proposed budget that you will be voting on this evening and this is why:
Last week one of our neighbors stood at this podium and challenged you on the correlation between test scores and learning environment. And then there is a segment of our community that would have you believe that the first bond issuance would be more than enough to cover the costs of the project and that the second bond is not needed.
Well in my opinion, this building project is not about test scores. And when you signed your name to that petition, I wonder if you were told what their project would NOT include.
To me, This building project is about a facility w/ an aged infrastructure that has outlived its useful life and about replacing it w/a LEED Silver Certified building that will be more energy efficient thus saving us, the taxpayers substantial money, Immediately.
To me, This is a about a building project that will refurbish our auditoriums that serves not just our students but our entire community.
To me, This is a about a building project that provides adequate gym space to host our Rec. League sports which benefits our children grades 2 through 8. This is a about a building project that addresses our out dated aqua facility and a building project enhances security throughout a building that will be ADA compliant.
The mythical $75m “project” doesn’t address any of these areas; there will be No benefits from LEED Certification, the pool and the gyms will be either inadequate or inferior and the Auditorium will still be difficult to access for those with special needs and the seats will remain ripped and broken. We must not forget that this building serves more than our children in grades 9-12. This building serves our community with programs such as Music for Mt. Lebanon, Rec League Sports, Adult League Sports and Adult Educational programs. And a project that ignores this reality does not serve the greater good of the community.
This is not about test scores, This is about vision. Just as We led the way in the ‘70’s with an Astro turf field and Our Fine Arts Facility, we will “LEED” the way in this new century with our Silver Certified building.
I urge you to pass this budget this evening and to continue to move forward with the current HS Building project.
These are the words that I read at the May 24th School Board meeting.
Thank you for your continued interest, Dean.
Rob:
Thanks for replying, I think we both agree that the building is in dire need of work. Some possibly due to neglect.
Following this process from the very first DeJong sessions, I found it extremely curious that the PDE document titled: Renovate or Build New was never made and still isn't-- conveniently available on the districts web site!
It highlights and applauds our district's renovations on a elementary and middle schools. There is also quite an informative section on older schools can be green too, in its pages.
As for discussions on what or may not be in a $75 million project, the analysis is provided by the very people pushing and profiting from the $113 million project!
Had the CAC been allowed to think outside of the board's predetermined box, they might have presented a plan that provides all the things you and I wish for $75 million.
You still haven't responded to my 2post in this topic.
Jan Biros comment that, "We naively thought, I guess, that by providing a beautiful building and great resources, these things would automatically yield change. They didn’t," Similar vision to yours, but according to the article it didn't deliver.
The other question concerned possible loss of LEED reimbursements if the building doesn't perform as advertised.
From what I know, we need to spend around $750,000 to get a $1.3 million reimbursement over some period of time. If the building doesn't perform as advertised we might never see those reimbursement funds!
That doesn't mean I'm against using energy efficient building materials, just that LEED looks like a crap shoot.
Dean Spahr
One other thought Rob.
I agree with Dr. Steinhauer's comments at the Audit & Finance meeting last week when comments were made about cutting curriculum and possibly teachers.
The wealth of this district lies not in the building, but with the depth of its programs and the professionalism of its teachers.
Unfortunately, I fear we can't have spend lavishly on both a building and teachers/curriculum.
Dean Spahr
The correct link is: LEED v3: Report Energy Usage or Risk Decertification and the exact quote is "...nearly half of the studied LEED certified buildings failed to meet their energy modeling projections, while 25 percent of projects were functioning significantly worse than anticipated...".
Now if half are below average and a quarter are well below average, then half are above average and probably a quarter are well above average. In other words, it's a bell curve, and projections are, on average, correct. They are only projections after all. Plus, as the field has evolved, one expects better and better projections. In fact, that's why you see so many companies offering Guaranteed Energy Savings contracts these days. The statistics cited above may have counted all the LEED projects going back 10 years or more. I bet the ones today are much better now.
If that's the worst thing you can find about LEED in the entire world wide web it doesn't sound too bad to me.
Thank you for your comments, Mr. Papke. I will again make the claim that I have made before. It is one that, according to the Allegheny County Assessment website, even applies to some of the folks who post here and are "against" the 113MM dollar, 55K per student boondoggle being thrust upon us.
The claim is that I, too, would be all for this new building if my share of the cost, based on my home's assessed value was less than the average home in Mt. Lebanon. Much like our current "progressive" tax code, it is a broken system. Kindly explain for me why it is "fair" for your kids to get the same education as my kids simply based on where we live? The left is all about fairness but only when it fits their definition of the word. Why is it fair that some American's pay 35% of their income to the IRS while 43 million filers pay NO income tax? Do they not work equally hard - if not harder? You want a fair system? Try this one on for size. Figure out the total budget necessary to fund the continuing operation of the school system you want, divide that amount by the total number of students USING the services of the school system, and mail out the invoices. That's what the private schools do. Equally fair would be letting one take their tax dollars dedicated to the local school system OUT of the system to be used in the school system or charter school of their choice. It's called competition. But, if you read the (I'm surprised to admit this) great story in last week's NYT Sunday Magazine about the NEA and its huge fear of anything less than (essentially) full tenure after three years you'd see what a pipe dream that is to guys on my side of the fence.
In short. You want a "LEED" Taj Mahal, Mr. Papke, pony up. Pay the same amount for your kid's education that I am going to be paying for mine. Because, from all appearances, we're stuck here with little chance of selling thanks in no small part to folks on the school board with homes assessed at a lot less than than the mean. (The other part involves a government that punished banks who didn't loan enough to folks who had no right buying a home, but that's a topic for another day.)
David-- you didn't add this paragraph from the article.
"In 2008 the USGBC anointed Seattle as the number one green building city in the county based on its then-41 LEED certified projects. But when LEED Silver certified schools in Washington failed to achieve expected energy savings, some called for the scrapping of the 2005 “green” school mandate altogether."
I'm not saying we don't incorporate energy efficiency into whatever we build, that's smart.
There was debate among the board early on whether to pursue LEED certification due to commissioning and certification fees in the neighborhood of $750,000.
My only question is with new rules suggesting decertification could cancel LEED payments-- are those fees worth the risk?
Add another thought in that the PA Dept. of Ed. claims older buildings can get LEED certification too.
Dean Spahr
David Brown, here's what was posted on Bloglebo July 23, 2009 on board discussion of LEED certification.
"Board member Mark Hart said the district could add all the energy efficient features without the LEED certification and commissioning. Costs would be less upfront and energy savings would still come down the road, he said. He voted against the $875,000 expenditure. Board member Dan Remely said the $450 fee would be payable immediately. But, he said the architect and project manager could weigh costs to see whether the building could even attain LEED silver. Those data will be offered in November. If it couldn’t attain silver, some or most of the $875,000 would be saved."
My original post ask are those costs worth the risk under the new rules?
Dean Spahr
Dean,
Those are better arguments than the statistic Mr. Franklin cited. I felt I had to respond to his lop-sided citation because children might be reading.
In fact, I too have reservations about going through the LEED process unless grants come in to offset most or all of the cost. In one construction project I am involved with, we decided we wanted to be green and energy efficient but it wasn't worth it to get the "gold star."
Of course, the most environmentally friendly thing of all is always to avoid frivolous spending or any kind of premature obsolescence, because that just ends up wasting resources and generating pollution for no benefit other than the short-term heat of burning money.
Is it really $875,000 just to complete the LEED certification, above and beyond the cost of the green building materials, construction practices, and energy conservation? Or does some of that reflect additional construction costs above architects' fees?
Don't call me lop-sided Mr. Brown. I didn't say squat about LEED, nor do I care about it. In the overall scheme of things, LEED this and green that aren't driving the price to $113 million.
David Brown:
Jo Posti writes on her blog...
"In the case of LEED buildings, commissioning must be conducted in order to achieve certification. There are two options available:
Fundamental Commissioning which OWP/P has estimated as:
$415,000 Commissioning agent
$285000 Contractor Costs
These costs include:
Commissioning Agent (CxA) creating a Commissioning Plan
CxA developing Commissioning Specs
Verifying Installation and Performance of Commissioned Systems
The other is Enhanced Commissioning which requires a third party to conduct the commissioning and costs an additional $250,000. This additional step earns one credit toward LEED certification. This additional cost includes:
CxA performing design reviews and submittal review
Producing O&M manual (contractor, Produce O&M Manual with help from CxA)
Providing training (contractor, with help from CxA)
10-month warranty follow up by Commissioning Agent
OWP/P would like the Board to provide direction regarding commissioning this month, in essence driving a vote on Monday regarding whether we intend to obtain LEED certification or a LEED Silver rating. In addition to the additional commissioning costs, there is a $175,000 US Green Building Commission cost estimate for registration, fees, forms and paperwork. In return, however, we could realize an additional $1.7 million reimbursement from the State if we obtain certification."
So to answer your question, from this explanation I don't believe any of the LEED costs include any "construction" cost.
Note also, the warranty appears to only be 10 months, not 10,20 or 30 years.
Add too that the LEED v3 article seems to indicate paperwork and audits will need to be done fairly regularly, which if the results don't meet expectations we lose reimbursements.
And those reimbursements as I understand don't come in one lump sum, but are stretched over a number of years.
David, you seem to have a better handle on all this than I, you state you worked on a potential LEED project and decided it wasn't worth it.
How do we evaluate ours?
Dean SPahr
@Dave Franklin: My mistake, Dave, sorry! These comments are hard as heck to read without "quote" and "html" options. The original statistic in the third comment was indeed Dean's. It amounted to something like "half of America is below average." But we're past that now.
@Dean: Sorry my expertise on this subject has just about run out. One last point though: Commissioning is often a very useful task irrespective of LEED because mechanical systems are getting more and more computerized and complicated. It takes a lot of time and effort to narrow down each feature and prove it is working so that the owner gets their money's worth and is not stuck with costs after the warranty period expires.
David Brown:
Glad you clarified, yes it is indeed hard to follow who said what.
Want to be clear that I'm not opposed to being energy efficient, I was only asking if it was wise to spend a large chunk of money upfront for "LEED certiification" in expectation of reimbursements and lower energy cost that may or may not come through down the road according to the article.
Dean Spahr
Here's a free LEED Webinar if anyone is interested. I make no guarantees about the quality, but RedVector is a well-known company in on-line training.
Meh. That was a pretty lame webinar. I hope no one else wasted their time.
Post a Comment
<< Home