Sanger Facilities Master Plan

Sanger Uni ed
S cho o l District
August 28, 2012
Facilities Master Plan
Every Child, Every Day,

Sanger Uni ed has twenty schools, including three charter schools, a community day school, and an adult school. district covers 180 square miles and serves a population of 31,000. e
Whatever it Takes!
Within the boundaries of Sanger Uni ed is the city of Sanger and the communities of Centerville, Del Rey, Fairmont, Lone Star, Tivy Valley and portions of the Sunnyside area of metropolitan Fresno. Attendance in the Districts schools currently numbers 10,500 students.
A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S
| Sanger Unied School District
Acknowledgments
Sanger Unied School District would like to thank all of the district sta who oered their time, comments, and overall vision for this Facilities Master Plan. In addition, SUSD would like to thank the following consultants for their professional services conducted in this Facilities Master Plan process: School Business Consulting, for advising the District through the entire master plan process.
Facilities Task Force

Marcus P. Johnson, Superintendent W. Richard Smith, Deputy Superintendent Eduardo Martinez, Administration Associate Superintendent Jon Yost, Associate Superintendent Richard Sepulveda, Chief Operations Ocer Brad Pawlowski, Director, Support Services Terry Tilley, Administration Director of Maintenance & Operations Tim Lopez, Area Administrator Matt Navo, Area Administrator Adela Jones, Area Administrator Lisa Houston, Ed.D., Principal, Centerville ES Susan Fitzgerald, Principal, Del Rey ES Jared Savage, Principal, Fairmont ES Debra Santos, Principal, Jackson ES Cathy Padilla, Principal, Jeerson ES Donna Vincenti, Principal, John Wash ES JoDee Marcellin, Principal, Lincoln ES Lori Welch, Principal, Lonestar ES Stephanie Rodriguez, Principal, Madison ES John Hannigan, Principal, Reagan ES Karl Kesterke, Principal, Sequoia ES Ken Garcia, Principal, Wilson ES Jamie Nino, Principal, Washington Academic MS Nick Taylor, Principal, Community Day HS Rick Church, Principal, Kings River HS/ Taft Independent Study School Dan Chacon, Principal, Sanger HS Alfred Sanchez, Principal, Hallmark Charter School Amy Williams, Principal, Quail Lake Environmental Charter School Christy Platt, Principal, Sanger Academy Charter School Nancy Penny, Principal, Sanger Adult School
Darden Architects, for assisting the District in reviewing the existing school sites, developing needrelated improvements and improvement budgets, preparing this master plan report, and creating possible draft concept solutions for the issues identied at the existing school sites.
Odell Planning & Research, for studying the student enrollment growth and identifying new facility requirements.
School Facility Consultants, for analyzing the State School Facility Program (SFP) eligibility.
Keygent Advisors, for analyzing the prospective 2012 General Obligation Bond scenarios.
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
| |Sanger Sanger Unied Unied School School District District
T A B L E
O F
C O N T E N T S | Sanger Unied School District
SECTION 1 | Overview of the Facilities Master Plan Process .............4 SECTION 2 | Executive Summary.......................................................10 SECTION 3 | Existing School Facilities Needs ...................................18
Elementary Schools ..........................................................................................20 Secondary Schools ............................................................................................44 Charter Schools ..................................................................................................56
SECTION 4 | Enrollment Projections .................................................64 SECTION 5 | New School Facility Needs ............................................72 SECTION 6 | District Facilities Needs.................................................76
Site Plans | District Facilities ...........................................................................78
SECTION 7 | Financing the Facilities Master Plan ............................88

Funds Currently Available ...............................................................................88 State School Building Eligibility ...................................................................89 General Obligation Bond ................................................................................97 Summary of Propositions 46 and 39/AB1908 .................................97 Comparison Between Prop. 46 and Prop. 39/AB1908 ..................98 Proposition 39 Scenarios .......................................................................99
This page was intentionally left blank
O V E R V I E W
O F
T H E
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
P R O C E S S
S E C T I O N
| Overview of the Facilities Master Plan Process
SECTION 1 | Overview of the Facilities Master Plan Process:

What is a Facilities Master Plan?
A Facilities Master Plan (FMP) is an organizational process that defines, identifies and establishes a need for facility improvements. Most commonly, existing school sites are the focus of internal facility improvements, but the FMP process also focuses on external growth factors that define and shape the planning for future schools. The purpose of the FMP is to establish an efficient process to change the Districts facilities to both accommodate and support current and future educational programs and other tangible District-owned facility assets. In an eort to simplify and dene what an FMP can accomplish, the process can be rened into a trifecta of basic components: needs, costs, and priorities. Needs: An identied set of facility/site improvements, or new construction needs. Costs: The determined anticipated capital costs to fund the needs and also identies a funding plan on how to fund the FMP. Priorities: An established timing of the needs that sets the planning into actionable events. Needs Identify improvements to existing facilities/sites and new schools to be constructed. Costs Determine the capital cost required to fund these facility needs, and determine funding strategy. Priorities Establish when the needs are required, and when the capital funds are required.
The Three-Part Trifecta of an FMP
ne
eds
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
Prioriti
es
co
sts
O V E R V I E W O F T H E FA C I L I T I E S M A S T E R P L A N P R O C E S S | Sanger Unied School District
Overview
The Sanger Unied School District Facilities Master Plan (FMP) is intended to establish a framework for the orderly development of facility improvements for the next 10 years or more. In the process of dening the parameters and needs for the FMP, the SUSD utilized the expertise and skill of specialty consultants and District sta. Of noteworthy importance, this FMP study is intended to be a dynamic planning document, not merely a printed report on the Districts facilities. This FMP process focuses on how existing and future buildings can best serve the students, sta and community of SUSD. That said, the FMP process is the Districts planning tool and strategy to look at and address facility improvements, their associated capital need, and a nancial plan to fund the improvements. An FMP is a data-driven process that provides the District with the ability to move master plan needs from the conceptual, need-oriented phase, toward a vision, and nally into the ultimate reality of completed projects. This report will present the data that has been collected, analyzed and synthesized into need-oriented improvements, with associated conceptual budgets. This FMP provides the SUSD leadership with a planning tool and road map for success. Using the FMP as a facilities planning tool, more specic details around the master plan improvements will unfold as the District denes its initial priorities for new and existing facility projects, based on available funds. The improvement needs will likely outweigh the available capital resources. As each need is coupled with a nancial budget, the District can then rene the initial priorities into a set of short-term, medium-term and long-term goals. Once these master plan priorities are set, this FMP will then be used as a planning tool to direct both the Districts human resources and capital resources. The SUSD FMP reects the needs and goals that were captured and identied through several meetings as well as an evaluation of the condition of existing schools and District administrative facilities. In an eort to align these activities with the District goals, the SUSDs Mission Statement was used by the committee as a standard for guiding the direction and purpose of this FMP. This FMP is not a static document and will require review and periodic updating. For example, the FMP will require updating as the rst round of prioritized improvements are being completed, and also as the assessment and impact of these improvements are understood. As the second round of prioritized improvements are being planned, the FMP should be updated to capture any additional improvement needs and/or changing needs that have arisen since the initial preparation of this FMP.
S E C T I O N
| Overview of the Facilities Master Plan Process
1
1.
The Expanded Four-Part Facilities Master Planning Process

Needs a. b. c. d. Dene the facility needs by setting clear objectives and acquiring good data. Assess and synthesize the data into a dened set of need-oriented, conceptual solutions. Identify a set of existing facility needs. Dene a set of new facility needs. Establish a set of District facilities needs.
Needs
2
2.
e.
Costs a. b. c. d. e. f. Dene funding budgets that respond to the existing facility needs. Dene funding budgets that respond to the new facility needs. Define funding budgets that respond to the District facilities needs. Determine funding sources. Determine the limit of the funding sources. Establish a nancial plan.
Costs Facilities Master Plan
3 4
3. 4.
Once the Facility Master Plan is adopted and funding sources secured, priorities are identied. Furthermore, as needs change the FMP must be updated periodically. (Refer to steps 3 and 4 below.) Priorities a. b. Dene when the needs are required and when the capital funds are required. Sort the needs into a set of priorities, short term (2-4 years), medium term (5-7 years) and long term (8-10 years).
Update
Priorities
1. 2. 3. 4.
Update the FMP a. b. c. Execute the FMP. Review and assess the impact of the FMP. Update and reassess the FMP every 4 to 5 years.
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
O V E R V I E W O F T H E FA C I L I T I E S M A S T E R P L A N P R O C E S S | Sanger Unied School District
Importance of Quality School Facilities

Since student achievement is impacted by specific building characteristics and effective learning environments, this FMP arms the District with an awareness of its facilities. This FMP also provides a list of facility recommendations that will allow SUSD decisionmakers to improve student achievement by enhancing the physical setting of SUSD schools. This allows SUSD to leverage quality schools to ensure the Mission Statement is being supported. Competition for student attendance has increased with the advent of school of choice, place of work, and open enrollment laws; private schools; charter schools; and other options parents have in determining which school their children attend. It is more important than ever for school districts to provide their community, staff and, most important, their students, with quality school facilities. Quality school facilities do not have to be new, but must provide students with a 21st century learning environment that is safe, clean and well maintained. Research has consistently shown that students academic performance increases when the schools they attend are clean, well maintained, and possess the classroom teaching tools that support a 21st century learning environment. Studies also show that student attendance rates increase when students know their school leaders and their communities are willing to invest in quality school facilities. Finally, the ability to attract and retain talented, high quality teachers and support sta is unequivocally related to the presence of wellmaintained facilities equipped to support a 21st century learning environment; and it is quality teacher and support sta who play a signicant role in students successful performance both in and out of the classroom.
-Modernization Policy Sub-Committee for the School of the Future Report
State Superintendent of Public Instruction, California Department of Education
E X E C U T I V E
S U M M A R Y
S E C T I O N
2 | Executive Summary
SECTION 2 | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The following list of facilities needs and their associated costs is a summarization of the detailed ndings presented in: t t t t t Section3 | Existing School Facilities Needs Section 4 | Enrollment Projections Section 5 | New School Facility Needs Section 6 | District Facilities Needs Section 7 | Financing the Facilities Master Plan
Table 2.1 Summarized Facilities Needs Total

Project Total Existing School Facilities Needs Total New School Facilities Needs Total District Facilities Needs SUSD TOTAL FACILITIES NEEDS Budget $182,590,800 $165,768,000 $34,604,600 $382,963,400
The needs represented have been derived from data from a number of sources and information, including but not limited to, individual school site input, District sta meetings, enrollment studies, school building analysis by qualied, licensed architects, and input from the Districts support services.
10
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
E X E C U T I V E
S U M M A R Y | Sanger Unied School District
Existing School Facilities Needs

The existing school facilities needs identied in this FMP were gathered as a result of visiting each of the school sites, as necessary, talking with the school site sta, and conducting visual observations of the facilities and assessing their conditions. The SUSDs Mission Statement Guiding Principles were utilized to determine and shape how the built environment of the existing school sites could be transformed to support: t t t t Student achievement SUSD sta Site safety The eective learning environment
Table 2.2 Summarized Existing School Facilities Needs

Project Centerville Elementary School Del Rey Elementary School Fairmont Elementary School Jackson Elementary School
E LE M E NTA RY
Budget $11,317,700 $9,032,600 $6,793,100 $10,772,100 $3,262,100 $2,460,200 $8,862,400 $8,054,300 $10,411,800 $464,600 $78,100 $8,945,800 $28,206,000 $2,961,000 $3,225,900 $1,366,600 $4,695,500 $ 14,016,800 $10,751,800 $13,437,000 $10,004,400 $13,471,000 $182,590,800
Jeerson Elementary School John S. Wash Elementary School Lincoln Elementary School Lone Star Elementary School Madison Elementary School Ronald W. Reagan Elementary School Sequoia Elementary School Wilson Elementary School Washington Academic Middle School Community Day School Kings River High (Cont)/Taft High School Child Welfare & Attendance Oce Adult School Sanger High School SUSD Agricultural Center Hallmark Charter School Quail Lake Environmental Charter School Sanger Academic Charter School TOTAL EXISTING SCHOOL FACILITIES NEEDS
Table 2.2 summarizes the total cost of existing school facility needs as identied in Section 3 | Existing School Facilities Needs of this report.
SE CONDA RY CH AR TE R
11
S E C T I O N
Enrollment Projections
Section 4| Enrollment Projections of the FMP is the result of an Enrollment Projections and Future School Needs report. It is projected that the total District enrollment will increase by 3,100 students during the next 10 years, with an average annual growth rate of 2.54 percent per year. Table 2.3 summarizes the projected enrollment growth in the District for the next 10 years by school type. Chart 2.1shows the projected enrollment growth in the Sanger Unified School District for the next 10 years.
TABLE 2.3 Projected Enrollment 2021-2022 School Year

SCHOOLS Sanger Area Elementary Southeast Fresno Area K-6 Rural Area Elementary Washington Academic Middle School Sanger High Charter Other* Total District Enrollment Projection** 201112 2,453 1,165 1,037 1,578 2,694 1,604 342 10,873 202122 2,777 2,087 1,243 2,111 3,399 1,930 426 13,973 AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATES 1.25% 7.24% 1.83% 2.95% 2.35% 1.87% 2.23% 2.54%
CHART 2.1 Sum of Schools Total District K-12
*Other includes Independent Study, Continuation, Community Day and SDC **Includes all District students
12
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
E X E C U T I V E
New School Facility Needs

The new school facility needs identied in the FMP were gathered from the results of demographic enrollment projections over the next 10 years. Table 2.5 summarizes the total cost of new school facilities needs as identied in Section 5 | New School Facility Needs
District Facilities Needs

The district facilities needs identied in the FMP were gathered as a result of talking with District site sta, as necessary, and conducting visual observations of the facilities. District facilities needs are improvements that increase the operational eciency and capacity of the District. Table 2.5 summarizes the total cost of district facilities needs as identied in Section 6 | District Facilities Needs.
Table 2.4 Summarized New School Facility Needs

Project Elementary School Middle School High School TOTAL NEW SCHOOL FACILITY NEEDS Budget $23,568,000 $44,587,000 $97,613,000 $165,768,000
Table 2.5 Summarized District Facilities Needs

Project District Oce Transportation Yard/Bus Maintenance Warehouse Maintenance and Operations Tom Flores Stadium New Stadium TOTAL DISTRICT FACILITIES NEEDS Budget $3,216,000 $8,204,300 $3,463,100 $2,906,300 $3,564,900 $13,250,000 $34,604,600
13
S E C T I O N
Financing the Capital Facilities Master Plan

Section 7 | Financing the Facilities Master Plan of this FMP identifies the funding sources available to the District that can be used to meet the facility needs identified in this FMP including local funds that do not require further voter-approval, State facility funds for which the District is eligible under the existing State facility program (SB 50) and three different scenarios of proceeds the District could receive from a voter-approved general obligation bond measure in 2012. Table 2.6 is a brief summary of the aforementioned funding sources.
Table 2.6 Funding Sources

Funds Currently Available for Capital Projects Uncommitted capital facility funds Developer fees (current and future) Sub-Total Funding Sources From State School Building Program New Construction Program Eligibility Modernization Program Eligibility Sub-Total TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDS WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL $38,134,633 $24,908,546 $63,043,179 $74,516,116 $11,472,937 $0 $11,472,937
Possible Voter-Approved General Obligation Bond $30 Tax Rate Increase $60 Tax Rate Increase Extend Existing Tax Rate TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDS IF $24,460,000 BOND APPROVED TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDS IF $50,000,000 BOND APPROVED TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDS IF $30,000,000 BOND APPROVED $24,460,000** $50,000,000** $30,000,000 $98,976,116 $124,516,116 $104,516,116
** Tax rate increase is based on the amount listed above ($30 or $60) per $100,000 of assessed valuation.
14
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
E X E C U T I V E
Need to Establish Priorities in Implementing the FMP

Based on the previously cited cost projections, SUSD would need a combined total of $382,963,400 to meet all the facility needs identied at existing school sites; construct three new schools to accommodate expected student growth during the next 10 years or more; and complete district wide improvements that enhance academic programs, increase safety, and reduce operational costs by increasing eciency. It will be necessary for the district to prioritize improvements identied in the FMP as the estimated available resources of approximately $98,976,116 to $124,516,116 (depending on the size of a possible general obligation bond measure) are insucient to meet all of the identied facility needs of the District. It will be the responsibility of the SUSD sta (administrator, certicated and classied employees) to establish facility priorities. Those determinations will be oered as recommendations to the Districts Governing Board for consideration of approval. The most critical facility needs of the District will likely be a balance between the needs of existing schools and the future needs to accommodate projected enrollment growth in the district.
15
E X I S T I N G
S C H O O L
F A C I L I T I E S
N E E D S
S E C T I O N
3 | Existing School Facilities Needs
SECTION 3 | EXISTING SCHOOL FACILITIES NEEDS:

The range of the existing school facility needs identified in this FMP vary in size and form. They consist of repairs, upgrades, remodels and additions. After requesting Requests for Qualications from several qualied architectural rms, the Districts Capital Facility Committee recommended and the Governing Board selected Darden Architects to review and assess the existing school sites and identify possible improvements and their associated costs. The existing school facility needs identied in this FMP were gathered as a result of visiting each of the school sites as necessary, talking with the school site sta, and conducting visual observations of the facilities and assessing their conditions. This process was directed toward looking at District facilities in an organized manner and engaging the school site sta on the needs of their respective schools. This process established a list of potential facility improvements. The solutions indicated in the existing facility needs should be viewed as conceptual only, with the understanding that actual architectural plans will be determined at a later date. The capital needs for the existing school facility needs was based upon the anticipated project costs in 2014 dollars. These costs include the construction costs (hard costs) and other non-direct costs (soft costs). The year 2014 was selected for the valuation of the dollar because it is the most probable date that the rst set of prioritized improvements would be ready for construction. After assessing the school sites, many needs were similar in nature. This began to dene certain oriented themes that could be applied across each school site. The need-oriented theme based improvements could be dened as one of the following typologies:
Academics:
Building Code:
Curb Appeal:
District Goals:
A B C D
These are need-oriented improvements that enhance and improve the academic teaching spaces. These improvements include teaching stations, such as new interior surfaces, lighting, mechanical and plumbing upgrades, technology system upgrades, window replacement projects and acoustical projects that all improve the sound quality within the classrooms. These are need-oriented improvements that respond to identiable building code concerns and must/should be addressed on any future project. These improvements may consist of Access Compliance governed by the Americans with Disabilities Act (parking lots, accessible path of travel, doors, gates, restrooms, signs, ramps and stairs), Fire and Life Safety (re alarms and re sprinklers), and Structural Safety. These are need-oriented improvements to improve the quality of the school sites and how the community perceives their schools. These may include such projects as entrance to the school and the parking lots, painting, roong, fencing, trash enclosures, vehicle drop-o zones, and the overall rst impression quality the school conveys to a visitor. These are need-oriented improvements that are important to the District as a whole. These may include improved and/or larger libraries and multi-use rooms, stadium improvements, safety and security, energy ecient retrot projects, and replacing portable classrooms with permanent classrooms.
18
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
E X I S T I N G S C H O O L F A C I L I T I E S N E E D S | Sanger Unied School District
The following graphic site plans illustrate the existing school sites and an accompanying draft conceptual vision. The draft conceptual vision is intended to identify in graphic form the list of improvements and their associated budgets. The draft concepts are not intended to be the nal design solution, but rather to illustrate the improvements that would be suitable for the school site. Each of the school sites will have a list of Proposed Improvements and an associated project budget in 2014 dollars. The Master Plan Improvement Total is the sum of the individual improvements. This gure then represents the nancial need necessary to fund the identied improvements. To oset these costs, the District is eligible for funds through the State of California via the School Facility Program (SFP). The listing of the Proposed State Funding identies the year and nancial amount of the potential modernization eligibility grants. The Available State Funds is the sum of potential State funded grants. The Local Funds Required is the dierence between the Master Plan Improvement Total and the Available State Funds, and represents the adjusted nancial need.
NOTE: The School Facility Program is subject to change, requires the District to match the State contribution, and it also requires the voters of the State to pass a future State school facility bond.
Table of contents
School Centerville Elementary School Del Rey Elementary School Fairmont Elementary School Jackson Elementary School
E LE M E NTA RY
Page 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 51 52 54 56 58 60
Jeerson Elementary School John S. Wash Elementary School Lincoln Elementary School Lone Star Elementary School Madison Elementary School Ronald W. Reagan Elementary School Sequoia Elementary School Wilson Elementary School Washington Academic Middle School Community Day School Kings River High (Cont)/Taft High School Child Welfare & Attendance Oce Adult School Sanger High School SUSD Agricultural Center Hallmark Charter School Quail Lake Environmental Charter School Sanger Academic Charter School
C H AR TE R
S ECONDA RY
19
C E N T E R V I L L E EXISTING
E L E M E N T A R Y |
CENTERVILLE ELEMENTARY 48 S. Smith Avenue

SCHOOL t Grade Level SITE t Site Acreage BUILDING t Total Building Area K-6
13.38 Acres
23,380 SF
LEGEND
Area to Remodel Existing Building New Building New Site Concrete Restoom Site, Keynote Symbol Building, Keynote Symbol Site, Storm Drainage System
BUILDING DESIGNATIONS Existing

A1 A2 A3 C K P1 P2 P3 P4 Classrooms Classrooms Administration/Cafeteria Classrooms Kindergarten Kindergarten/After School Resource Pre-School/Special Programs Classrooms
Master
A3 J L M Library/Computer Lab Multi-Purpose Classrooms Pre-School/After School
20
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
EXISTING SCHOOL FACILITIES NEEDS

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements MCP-E2 BN-T BI-T4 ID-S1 PF-B3 TE-C2 BO-W2 BE-F1 BE-R2 S-SD2 MB-E3 S-SW1 FS-S3 EP-G3 PA-S1 PL-S3 PC-2 PG-2 BN-MP BI-L4 BI-C2 BN-K LZ-B3 BN-C BP-SP2 Mechanical Central Plant, Equipment: Replace $164,700 Building New, Toilets $249,600 Building Interior, Toilets: Recongure $104,700 Identication Device, Site: School Marque $32,900 Play Fields, Backstops: New $107,100 Technology Equipment, Classroom: New $51,000 Building Openings, Windows: Partial Replacement $148,900 Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint $80,000 Building Exterior, Roong: Remove & Replace $308,600 Site, Storm Drainage: New $105,900 Mechanical Building, Equipment: Replace $303,400 Site, Sewer: Modify $42,500 Fire Sprinklers, Site: New $567,200 Electrical Power, Generator: New $95,500 Public Address, Site: Modify $32,900 Parking Lot, Sta : New $915,100 Play Court: Remove & Replace $331,600 Play Ground: Remove & Replace $177,300 Building New, Multi-Purpose $5,176,400 Building Interior, Library: Recongure Spaces $170,800 Building Interior, Classroom: New Finishes $47,500 Building New, Kindergarten $731,600 Loading Zone, Bus: New $143,400 Building New, Classrooms $1,186,600 Building Portable, Special Programs: Relocate $42,500 $11,317,700
| CENTERVILLE ELEMENTARY MASTER PLAN
COST
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding 2018 2019 State SFP Modernization Match (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%)
$344,258 $513,712 $857,970
Available State Funds
TOTAL LOCAL FUNDS REQUIRED
$10,459,730
21
D E L EXISTING
R E Y
DEL REY ELEMENTARY 10620 E. Morro Avenue

10.0 Acres
35,877 SF
LEGEND

A B1 B2 C D E F J K M P1 Auditorium Classrooms Toilets Kindergarten Classrooms Cafeteria Classrooms Pre-School Administration/Library Infant Care Neighborhood Resource Center
Master Plan
O Q Toilets Kindergarten
22
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
E X I S T I N G S C H O O L F A C I L I T I E S N E E D S | DEL REY ELEMENTARY

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements BI-L3 MB-E3 BI-PA2 BI-MP3 BI-C3 TB-C1 ID-S1 S-WA1 S-FO3 S-FS1 PC-2 PF-1 PF-B3 BO-W2 BO-D3 BE-F1 BE-R1 BE-R3 MCP-E3 BN-T BI-T4 BN-K BI-P3 BI-SP4 LZ-B3 LZ-P3 PL-S3 PL-P3 S-FE3 Building Interior, Library: New Finishes + MEP $868,900 Mechanical Building Equipment: Replacement $148,500 Building Interior, Auditorium: New Finishes $131,200 Building Interior, Multi-Purpose: Recongure Spaces $73,400 Building Interior, Classrooms: Finishes+MEP $463,600 Technology Building, Classroom: Equipement $153,100 Identication Devices, Site: School Marque $32,900 Site, Walkways Accessibility: Partial Replacement $113,400 Site, Fencing Ornamental: New $77,200 Site, Fencing Security: Repair $69,400 Play Courts: Remove & Replace $218,300 Play Fields: Regrade & Turf $499,300 Play Fields, New: Backstops $107,100 Building Opening, Windows: Partial Replacement $298,000 Building Opening, Doors: Partial Replacement $93,900 Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint $136,100 Building Exterior, Roong: Maintenance $249,100 Building Exterior, Roong: Partial Replacement $153,400 Mechanical Central Plant, Equipment: Replacement $65,900 Building New, Toilets $1,985,200 Building Interior, Toilets: ADA Reconguration $302,700 Building New, Kindergarten $1,787,600 Building Interior, Pre-School: Finishes + MEP $42,500 Building Interior, Spec. Prog.: Recongure Spaces $135,900 Loading Zone, Bus: New $143,400 Loading Zone, Parent: New $143,400 Parking Lot, Sta : New $294,000 Parking Lot, Parent: New $143,400 Site, Fencing Enclosure: New $101,800 $9,032,600
COST
MASTER PLAN
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding 2015 State SFP Modernization Match (60%)
$776,000 $776,000
$8,256,600
23
F A I R M O N T EXISTING
FAIRMONT ELEMENTARY 3095 N. Greenwood Ave.

12.0 Acres
37,723 SF
LEGEND

A B C D E F H I K L M N P Classrooms Classrooms/Administration Mechanical Classrooms Classrooms Kindergarten Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Restrooms Classrooms
Master Plan
Q R S T Multi-Purpose Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms
24
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements LZ-B3 LZ-P1 PL-S3* BI-C2 BI-A4 BI-T3 ID-S1 PF-1 S-LF1 BO-W2 BO-D2 BE-F1 BE-R1 MCP-E3 BN-T BN-C S-SS2 PC-2 Loading Zone, Bus: New $143,400 Loading Zone, Parent: Seal & Strip $143,400 Parking Lot, Sta : New $294,000 Building Interior, Classroom: New Finishes $485,100 Building Interior, Admin.: Recongure Spaces $126,000 Building Interior, Toilets: Finishes+MEP $116,200 Identication Devices, Site: School Marque $32,900 Play Fields: Regrade & Turf $499,300 Site, Lighting eld: Practice $29,800 Building Openings, Windows: Partial Replacement $233,100 Building Openings, Doors: Partial Replacement $62,600 Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint $136,100 Building Exterior, Roong: Maintenance $55,200 Mechanical Central Plant, Equipment: Replacement $98,800 Building New, Toilets $349,500 Building New, Classrooms $3,522,700 Site, Shade Structure: Relocate $231,400 Play Courts: Remove & Replace $233,600 $6,793,100
| FAIRMONT ELEMENTARY MASTER PLAN
COST
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding 2014 2015 2016 2018 Current Available Funding (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%)
$565,686 $205,686 $998,616 $91,254 $237,344 $2,098,586
$4,694,514
* Cost does not include purchase of additional site acreage.
25
J A C K S O N EXISTING
JACKSON ELEMENTARY 1810 3rd St.

9.0 Acres
31,296 SF
LEGEND

A1 A2 B C D E J Classrooms Classrooms Kindergarten Classrooms & Library Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms
Master Plan
E J K Classrooms Classrooms Multi-Purpose
26
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
E X I S T I N G S C H O O L F A C I L I T I E S N E E D S | JACKSON ELEMENTARY
FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements BI-C2 ID-S1 S-WA2 S-FE3 ID-B2 P-DF3 BO-W2 BO-D2 BE-R3 S-SD2 MCP-E3 MB-E1 BN-MP BI-C4 BI-T2 LZ-B2 LZ-P3 PL-S3 PC-2 BN-K BN-C PF-B3 BE-F1 TE-C3 Building Interior, Classrooms: New Finishes $421,900 Identication Device, Site: School Marque $32,900 Site, Walkway Accessibility: Partial Replacement $113,400 Site, Fence Enclosure: New $109,400 Identication Device, Building: Signs $18,600 Plumbing, Drinking Fountains: New $19,800 Building Openings, Windows: Partial Replacement $138,700 Building Openings, Doors: Partial Replacement $54,800 Building Exterior, Roof: Replace $82,600 Site, Storm Drainage: Modify $49,000 Mechanical Central Plant, Equipment: Replace $65,900 Mechanical Building, Equipment: Replace $453,000 Building New, Multi-Purpose $4,201,700 Building Interiors, Classrooms: Recongure Spaces $348,800 Building Interiors, Toilets: New Finishes $49,800 Loading Zone, Bus: Remove & Replace $143,400 Loading Zone, Parent: New $143,400 Parking Lot, Sta : New $694,100 Play Courts: Remove & Replace $254,200 Building New, Kindergarten $682,000 Building New, Classrooms $2,373,200 Play Fields, Backstops: New $107,100 Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint $122,500 Technology Equipment, Classrooms: New $91,900 $10,772,100
COST
MASTER PLAN
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding 2016 2018 2019 2022 Current Available Funding (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%)
$969,822 $84,184 $227,274 $173,968 $440,290 $1,895,538
$8,876,562
27
J E F F E R S O N EXISTING
JEFFERSON ELEMENTARY 1110 Tucker Ave.

11.0 Acres
43,967 SF
LEGEND

A1 A2 A3 A4 B C D E F P P2 P3 Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Kindergarten Classrooms Classrooms Administration Library / Computer Lab Multi-Purpose Pre-School / Healthy Start Kindergarten Classrooms
28
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements BI-C3 BI-C2 ID-S1 PC-1 S-SS3 PG-1 BO-G1 BE-F2 BE-F1 S-LI1 S-LI2 MCP-E3 MB-E2 BN-A BI-A4 PL-V3 LZ-P3 OS-W2 S-FO3 BN-K Building Interior, Classroom: Finishes+MEP Building Interior, Classroom: New Finishes Identication Devices, Site: School Marque Play Courts: Remove & Replace Site, Shade Structure: New Play Grounds: Remove & Replace Building Openings, Glass: Partial Replacement Building Exterior, Finishes: Repairs Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint Site, Landscape & Irrigation: Soil Treatment Site, Landscape & Irrigation: Equipment Mechanical Central Plant, Equipment: Replacement Mechanical Building, Equipment: Replacement Building New, Administration Building Interior, Administration: Recongure Spaces Parking Lot, Visitors: New Loading Zone, Parents: New O-Site, Walkway: Inll Sidewalk Site, Fencing Ornamental: New Building New, Kindergarten $433,000 $98,900 $32,900 $53,300 $71,500 $4,500 $218,000 $16,500 $104,800 $156,000 $82,400 $65,900 $263,800 $375,300 $133,100 $47,800 $143,400 $79,400 $77,200 $804,400
| JEFFERSON ELEMENTARY MASTER PLAN
COST
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding 2018 2019 State SFP Modernization Match (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%)
$3,262,100
$374,954 $886,986 $1,261,940
$2,000,160
29
J O H N EXISTING
S .
W A S H
JOHN S. WASH ELEMENTARY 6350 E. Lane Ave.

13.0 Acres
35,837 SF
LEGEND

A B C D E F Classroom Kindergarten/Administration Classroom/Administration Classroom/Library Mechanical Multi-Purpose
Master Plan
G H Kindergarten Pre-School (Future)
30
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements MB-E3 BI-C3 TE-C1 ID-S1 PC-1 BO-W1 BE-F1 PL-S3 S-SS3 BN-K S-FL1 Mechanical Building, Equipment: Replace Building Interior, Classroom: Finishes + MEP Technology Equipment, Classroom: New Identication Devices, Site: School Marque Play Courts: Seal & Stripe Building Opening, Glass: Partial Replacement Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint Parking Lot, Sta : New Site, Shade Structure: New Building New, Kindergarten: New Site, Lighting Field: Practice $236,200 $306,500 $91,900 $32,900 $13,300 $112,000 $125,000 $821,500 $214,400 $446,900 $59,600 $2,460,200
| JOHN S. WASH ELEMENTARY MASTER PLAN
COST
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding Current Available Funding (60%) Available State Funds
$1,210,000 $1,210,000
$1,250,200
31
L I N C O L N EXISTING
LINCOLN ELEMENTARY 1700 14th St.

12.0 Acres
42,218 SF
LEGEND
Area to Remodel Existing Building New Building New Site Concrete Restroom Site, Keynote Symbol Building, Keynote Symbol Site, Storm Drainage System

A1 A2 A3 A4 B C D E P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Kindergarten Kindergarten/Classrooms Administration Classrooms Classrooms Library/Computer Lab Pre-School Multi-Purpose Special Education Pals/NRC Classrooms Classrooms Kindergarten
Master Plan
A1 A3 D F G H J Administration Special Programs Kindergarten Classrooms Special Education Pals/NRC Pre-School
32
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements PF-3* BI-A4 ID-S1 S-FO3 S-FE3 BI-C3 BO-G2 BO-D2 BE-F1 BP-PS3 BN-K BI-C4 BN-SE BN-C LZ-B3 LZ-P3 SL-P3 S-FS2 S-LF1 PC-2 PG-3 S-SS3 BI-K2 Play Fields: New $751,500 Building Interior, Admin.: Recongure Spaces $184,800 Identication Devices, Site: School Marque $32,900 Site, Fencing Ornamental: New $77,200 Site, Fencing Enclosures: New $37,100 Building Interior, Classrooms: Finishes+MEP $214,400 Building Openings, Glass: Partial Replacement $219,700 Building Openings, Doors: Partial Replacement $78,200 Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint $149,000 Building Portables, Pre-School: New $1,787,600 Building New, Kindergarten $1,564,100 Building Interior, Classroom: Recongure Spaces $184,800 Building New, Special Education $1,564,100 Building New, Classrooms $618,000 Loading Zone, Bus: New $143,350 Loading Zone, Parent: New $143,350 Site Lighting, Parking: New $14,200 Site Fencing, Enclosure: Replace $77,200 Site Fencing, Ornamental, New $77,200 Play Courts: Remove & Replace $302,900 Play Grounds: New $28,400 Site, Shade Structures: New $107,200 Building Interiors, Kindergarten: New Finishes $505,200 $8,862,400
| LINCOLN ELEMENTARY MASTER PLAN
COST
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding 2013 2016 2018 2019 State SFP Modernization Match (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%)
$1,268,204 $121,474 $137,748 $62,600 $1,590,026
$7,272,374
* Any costs associated with District reacquiring use of City Park are not included. 33
L O N E EXISTING
S T A R
LONE STAR ELEMENTARY 2617 S. Fowler Ave.

16.0 Acres
37,129 SF
LEGEND

A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3 C P1 P2 D1 D2 Classrooms Muliti-Purpose Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Administration / Kindergarten Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms District Storage District Storage
Master Plan
A2 B3 E Library / Administration Kindergarten Multi-Purpose
34
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements BI-F2 ID-S1 S-WA2 S-LB3 S-SS3 PC-3 PF-B3 BO-D1 BE-F1 BE-R1 MCP-E2 BN-MP FS-S3 BI-L4 BI-K4 S-LP3 S-SS3 PG-3 S-DF3 Building Interior, Finishes: New $519,500 Identication Device, Site: School Marque $32,900 Site, Walkway Accessibility: Partial Replacement $113,400 Site, Lighting Bus: New $9,800 Site, Shade Structure: New $35,700 Play Courts: Remove & Replace $268,000 Play Fields, Backstops: New $107,100 Building Opening, Doors: Partial Replacement $31,300 Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint $136,100 Building Exterior, Roof: Maintenance $23,500 Mechanical Central Plant, Equipment: Replace $164,700 Building New, Multi-Purpose $5,261,500 Fire Sprinklers, Site: New $567,200 Building Interior, Library: Recongure Spaces $400,200 Building Interior, Kindergarten: Recongure Spaces $128,100 Site, Lighting Parking: New $33,700 Site, Shade Structure: New $71,500 Play Ground: New $143,500 Site, Drinking Fountain: New $6,600 $8,054,300
| LONE STAR ELEMENTARY MASTER PLAN
COST
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding 2015 State SFP Modernization Match (60%)
$950,000 $950,000
$7,104,300
35
M A D I S O N EXISTING
MADISON ELEMENTARY 2324 Cherry Ave.

14.53 Acres
35,404 SF
LEGEND

A B C D E Classrooms Multi-Purpose/Classrooms Portable Classroom Kindergarten Administration
Master Plan
C G H Special Education Multi-Purpose Classrooms
36
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements BI-C3 ID-S1 S-FO3 BO-D1 BE-F1 BE-R2 MCP-E2 BN-MP PC-2 BI-L4 S-WA2 S-LW3 BI-T1 PG-4 S-SS3 PF-B3 S-LF1 BN-K BN-C Building Interiors, Classrooms: Finishes+MEP Identication Devices, Site: School Marque Site Fencing, Ornamental: New Building Openings, Doors: Partial Replacement Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint Building Exterior, Roong: Remove & Replace Mechanical Central Plant, Equipment: Replace Building New, Multi-Purpose Play Courts: Remove & Replace Building Interiors, Library: Recongure Spaces Site, Walkways Accessibility: Remove & Replace Site, Lighting Walkways: New Building Interiors, Toilets: Clean & Paint Play Ground: New Equipment Site, Shade Structure: New Play Fields, Backstops: New Site, Lighting Fields: Practice Building New, Kindergarten Building New, Classrooms $878,400 $32,900 $77,200 $39,100 $120,500 $212,900 $65,900 $5,176,400 $334,100 $387,100 $141,800 $29,800 $294,300 $56,700 $85,100 $107,100 $113,100 $732,900 $1,526,500 $10,411,800
| MADISON ELEMENTARY MASTER PLAN
COST
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding 2018 2019 Current Available Funding State SFP Modernization Match (60%) State SFP Modernization Match (60%)
$1,445,214 $270,000 $223,336 $1,938,550
$8,473,250
37
R O N A L D EXISTING
W .
R E A G A N
RONALD W. REAGAN ELEMENTARY 1586 S. Indianola Ave.

SCHOOL t Grade Level SITE t Site Acreage BUILDING t Total Building Area K-5 12.31 Acres 44,957 SF
LEGEND

A B C D E F Administration/Media Multi-Purpose Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Kindergarten
38
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements TE-C3 MB-E1 ID-S1 PG-1 BE-F1 S-SS3 Technology Equipment, Classroom: New Mechanical Building, Equipment: Repairs Identication Devices, Site: School Marque Play Ground: Modify Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint Site, Shade Structure: New $214,400 $8,200 $32,900 $20,400 $153,000 $35,700 $464,600
| RONALD W. REAGAN ELEMENTARY MASTER PLAN
COST
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding Not yet eligible Available State Funds
N/A
$464,600
39
S E Q U O I A EXISTING
SEQUOIA ELEMENTARY 1820 S. Armstrong

12.10 Acres
46,463 SF
LEGEND

A B C D E F Administration/Media Multi-Purpose Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Kindergarten
40
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements S-SS3 S-DF3 Site, Shade Structure: New Site, Drinking Fountain: New $71,500 $6,600 $78,100
| SEQUOIA ELEMENTARY MASTER PLAN
COST
N/A
$78,100
41
W I L S O N EXISTING
WILSON ELEMENTARY 610 Faller Ave.

10.72 Acres
42,092 SF
LEGEND

A B C D D1 E F1 F2 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 Administration Kindergarten Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Library/Media Multi-Purpose/Kitchen Portable Classrooms Portable Classrooms Portable Classrooms Portable Computer Lab Portable Pre-School Portable Pre-School Portable Pre-School
Master Plan
B1 P Kindergarten Portable Classrooms
42
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements S-LF1 BI-FS3 BI-T2 ID-S1 S-FO3 BO-W1 BO-D1 BE-F1 MB-E2 BI-L4 BI-SP4 BI-A4 LZ-B3 LZ-P3 PL-S4 S-SS3 PC-2 PF-B3 PG-E2 BN-K BN-C BP-C2 S-SA3 S-FE3 BI-MP4 TE-C3 BI-T3 Site, Lighting Fields: Practice $35,400 Building Interior, Food Service: Recongure Spaces $434,900 Building Interior, Toilets: Finishes + MEP $192,700 Identication Devices, Site: School Marque $32,900 Site, Fencing Ornamental: New $154,400 Building Openings, Windows: Partial Replacement $289,800 Building Openings, Doors: Partial Replacement $43,800 Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint $154,700 Mechanical Building, Equipment: Repairs $165,300 Building Interiors, Library: Recongure Spaces $373,600 Building Interiors, Sp. Prog.: Recongure Spaces $401,200 Building Interiors, Admin.: Recongure Spaces $136,100 Loading Zone, Bus: New $143,400 Loading Zone, Parent: New $143,400 Parking Lot, Sta : New $505,200 Site, Shade Structures $71,400 Play Courts: Relocate $391,700 Play Fields, Backstops: New $107,100 Play Ground, Equipment: Relocate $28,400 Building New, Kindergarten $1,564,100 Building New, Classrooms $1,789,200 Building Portable, Classroom: Relocate $141,800 Site, Student Amphitheater $231,400 Site, Fence Enclosure: New $143,400 Building Interior, MP: Recongure Space $984,800 Technology Equipment, Classroom: New $142,900 Building Interiors, Toilet: Recongure Spaces $142,800 $8,945,800
| WILSON ELEMENTARY MASTER PLAN
COST
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding 2018 Current Available Funding State SFP Modernization Match (60%)
$480,000 $1,135,000 $1,615,000
$7,330,800
43
W A S H I N G T O N EXISTING
A C A D E M I C
M I D D L E |
WASHINGTON ACADEMIC MIDDLE 1705 10th Street

SCHOOL t Grade Level SITE t Site Acreage BUILDING t Total Building Area 6-8
22.0 Acres
168,319 SF
LEGEND

A B1 B2 C D E F G H I J K L M N O P1-4 Q R S T U V V-1 W XX Z Y Gymnasium Auditorium Admin/Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Multi-Purpose Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms/Band Classrooms/Library Classrooms Administration Classrooms Portable Classrooms Pool House Maintenance Department Gymnasium Maintenance Classroom/AG Restroom Snack Bar Classrooms/AG V.R.O.P Restroom Lockers
44
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements S-FO3 BE-F1 BO-W3 TE-C3 B-TS BI-CA BO-D3 BE-R3 ID-S1 PL-S2 S-LW3 S-WA PC-2 S-SD1 MCP-E3 MB-E3 SA-4 S-LI4 B-MP S-SQ2 BI-S4 B-L BI-LS4 BI-G3 LZ-B3 LZ-P2 PF-B3 BP-C2 Site, Fencing Ornamental: New $79,400 Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint $740,000 Building Openings, Windows: Partial Replacement $393,000 Technology Equipment, Classrooms: New $350,500 Building, Theater/Stage: Addition/Interior $2,854,200 Building Interior, Classrooms/Admin. $3,479,600 Building Openings, Doors: Partial Replacement $65,700 Building Exterior, Roof: Partial Replacement $1,212,200 Identication Device, Site: School Marque $32,900 Parking Lot, Sta : Remove & Replace $3,567,000 Site, Lighting Walkways: New $7,800 Site, Walkway Accessibility $898,600 Play Courts: Remove & Replace $406,400 Site, Storm Drainage $330,700 Mechanical Central Plant $444,800 Mechanical Building, Equipment: Replace $241,600 Security Alarm: New $141,800 Site, Landscape & Irrigation: Equipment Replacement $82,400 Building, Multi-Purpose: Addition & Remodel $5,124,200 Site, Student Quad: Modify $1,939,400 Building Interior, Science: Recongure Spaces $1,571,400 Building, Library: Addition & Remodel $1,892,800 Building Interior, Locker/Shower: Recongure Spaces $696,500 Building Interior, Gymnasium: Recongure Spaces $1,125,100 Loading Zone, Bus: New $286,700 Loading Zone, Parent: New $143,400 Play Fields, Backstops: New $41,200 Building Portable, Classrooms: Relocated $56,700 $28,206,000 $1,494,231 $200,825 $176,858 $326,016 $4,953,501 $7,151,431
| WASHINGTON ACADEMIC MIDDLE MASTER PLAN
COST
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding Current Available Funding 2014 State SFP Modernization Match (60%) 2016 State SFP Modernization Match (60%) 2017 State SFP Modernization Match (60%) 2023 State SFP Modernization Match (60%) Available State Funds
$21,054,569
45
C O M M U N I T Y EXISTING
D A Y |
COMMUNITY DAY Existing: 818 L Street | Relocate to: 1020 N Street

SCHOOL t Grade Level SITE t New Site Acreage BUILDING t Total Building Area 9-12 0.75 Acres (+/-)16,740 SF
LEGEND
MASTER PLAN BUILDING DESIGNATIONS Existing

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 100 Administration/Classroom
Master Plan
Restroom Classrooms Classroom Classroom Classroom Classroom
Administration Multi-Purpose
46
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements S-DB OS-W3 OS-UC S-EW PL-S3 PC-3 S-SS3 ID-S2 S-FS3 S-FO3 S-W3 BP-C3 BP-T3 BP-A3 BP-MP3 Site, Demolition O Site, Walkways: New O Site, Utility: Connections Site, Earthwork Parking Lot, Sta : New Play Courts: New Site, Shade Structures: New Identication Devices, Site: School Sign Site, Fencing Security: New Site, Fencing Ornamental: New Site, Walkways: New Building Portables, Classrooms: New Building Portables, Toilets: New Building Portable, Administration: New Building Portable, Multi-Purpose: New $150,300 $23,600 $53,200 $81,900 $256,400 $87,000 $71,500 $32,900 $33,500 $45,400 $29,800 $1,146,500 $408,400 $269,300 $271,300 $2,961,000
| COMMUNITY DAY MASTER PLAN
COST
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding Need more data to determine Available State Funds
N/A
$2,961,000
47
R I K EN EG D SL E RY I VH E R I GH HI G SH C H ( C OO ON L T |) / Kings T ACanyon F T Unied H I G School H | Existing District School Facilities Needs EXISTING
KINGS RIVER HIGH CONT/TAFT HIGH 1905 7th St. | Relocate to 2207 1/2 9th Ave.
SCHOOL t Grade Level Existing District Oce SITE t Existing Site Acreage t New Site Acreage 9-12
2.0 Acres 1.5 Acres

14,400 SF
BUILDING t Total Building Area
LEGEND

B C P5 P6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Administration/Classrooms Restroom Classrooms Classrooms Administration Metal Shop/Classroom Library Restroom Classroom Multi-Purpose Classroom Classroom Classroom Classroom
Master Plan
48
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
E X I S T I N G S C H O O L F A C I L I TM I EA S SN T EED RS P | L KINGS A N RIVER | HIGH REEDLEY (CONT)/TAFT HIGH SCHOOL HIGH

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements ID-S1 BP-C BI-MP4 BI-V4 BI-C4 BI-L4 BI-A4 BP-T S-W3 PC-3 BI-C3 Identication Device, Site: School Marque Building Portables, Classrooms: New Building Interiors, Multi-Purpose: Recongure Spaces Building Interiors, Vocational: Recongure Spaces Building Interiors, Classroom: Recongure Spaces Building Interiors, Library: Recongure Spaces Building Interiors, Admin.: Recongure Spaces Building Portables, Toilets: New Site, Walkways: New Play Courts: New Building Interiors, Classrooms: Recongure $32,900 $917,200 $252,100 $424,200 $148,300 $436,100 $340,300 $408,400 $59,100 $39,700 $167,600
COST
MASTER PLAN
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding Current Available Funding Available State Funds
$3,225,900
$1,032,765 $1,032,765
$2,193,135
49
C H I L D W E L FA R E & AT T E N DA N C E O F F I C E MASTER PLAN
CHILD WELFARE & ATTENDANCE OFFICE 1705 10th Street

SITE t Site Acreage BUILDING t Total Building Area 0.7 Acres 1,920 SF
FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements S-DI OS-W3 S-EW S-UC PL-S3 ID-S1 S-FS3 S-FO3 S-W3 S-LI4 BP-A3 OS-UC Site, Demolition: Improvements O Site, Walkways: New Site, Earthwork Site, Utilities: Service Parking Lot, Sta : New Identication Devices, Site: Facility Sign Site, Fencing Security: New Site, Fencing Ornamental: New Site, Walkways: New Site, Landscape Irrigation: New Building Portables, Administration: New O-site Utility Connection
COST
LEGEND
Area to Remodel Existing Building New Building
BUILDING DESIGNATIONS Master Plan

1 2 Administration Child Welfare
$94,100 $36,200 $77,100 $177,900 $222,400 $19,800 $22,000 $60,400 $28,500 36,400 $538,600 $53,200 $1,366,600
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding Not eligible
New Site Concrete Restroom Site, Keynote Symbol Building, Keynote Symbol Site, Storm Drainage System
N/A
$1,366,600
50
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
A D U L T
S C H O O L |
Existing School Facilities Needs MASTER PLAN
ADULT SCHOOL 1045 Bethel Ave.

SITE t Site Acreage BUILDING t Total Building Area
0.7 Acres
9,120 SF
FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements S-DI S-EW S-UC PL-S3 ID-S2 S-FS3 S-W3 BP-A3 BP-C3 BP-T BP-PS3 PG-3 PG-E3 S-SS3 Site, Demolition: Improvements Site, Earthwork Site, Utilities: Connections Parking Lot, Sta/Students: New Identication Devices, Site: School Sign Site, Fencing Security: New Site, Walkways: New Building Portable, Administration: New Building Portable, Classrooms: New Building Portable, Toilets: New Building Portable, Pre-School: New Play Ground: New Play Ground, Equipment: New Site, Shade Structure: New
COST
$58,200 $321,000 $177,900 $1,388,900 $19,800 $48,000 $142,600 $538,600 $1,146,500 $408,400 $299,300 $46,400 $28,400 $71,500 $4,695,500
LEGEND
Area to Remodel Existing Building New Building
BUILDING DESIGNATIONS Master Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Classroom Classroom Classroom Classroom Administration Administration Classroom Pre-School Toilets
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding
New Site Concrete
Not yet eligible Available State Funds N/A

Restroom Site, Keynote Symbol Building, Keynote Symbol Site, Storm Drainage System
$4,695,500
51
S A N G E R EXISTING
H I G H
S C H O O L |
SANGER HIGH SCHOOL 1045 Bethel Ave.

SCHOOL t Grade Level SITE t Site Acreage BUILDING t Total Building Area 9-12
60.0 Acres
234,050 SF
LEGEND

A B C D E F G H J K L M N P Q1 Q2 S T U1 U2 X V Administration Classrooms Classrooms Multi-Purpose/Kitchen Classroom/Tech Shops Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Library/Media Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Gym Gym Concession Wrestling Portable Classrooms Portable Classrooms Agricultural Center Locker Shower Portable Classrooms
Master Plan
W
52
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements BI-MP3 Building Interior, Multi-Purpose: Finishes + MEP $82,400 ID-S1 Identifying Device, Site: School Marque $32,900 S-WA2 Site, Walkways Accessibility: Partial Replacement $170,200 PF-L1 Play Fields, Layout: Modify $41,200 BE-F1 Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint $796,500 BE-R2 Building Exterior, Roong: Repairs $660,200 MCP-E2 Mechanical Central Plant: Remove & Replace $889,500 MCP-D2 Mechanical Central Plant, Distribution: Repair $128,500 FA-SD2 Fire Alarm, Site Distribution: Remove & Replace $340,300 FA-NE2 Fire Alarm, Network Equipment: Remove & Replace $113,400 SA-SD1 Security Alarm, Site Distribution: Repair $141,800 BN-L/S Building New, Locker/Shower: Permanent $4,440,300 BI-G4 Building Interiors, Gym: Recongure Spaces $1,457,300 BI-IT3 Building Interiors, Industrial Tech.: Finishes + MEP $378,900 LZ-S3 Loading Zone, Service: Remove & Replace $647,000 S-W4 Site, Walkways: New $132,300 BP-T Building Portables, Toilets: New $408,400 S-SA3 Site, Student Amphitheater: Recongure $1,310,200 BP-C2 Building Portables, Classrooms: Relocate $42,500 S-LF1 Site, Lighting Fields: Practice $196,400 PC-3 Play Courts: Remove & Replace $1,606,600 Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding Not yet eligible Available State Funds N/A $14,016,800
| SANGER HIGH SCHOOL MASTER PLAN
COST
$14,016,800
53
A G R I C U L T U R A L EXISTING
C E N T E R |
AGRICULTURAL CENTER 1045 Bethel Ave. | Relocate to Del Rey Ave. & North Ave.
SCHOOL t Grade Level SITE t Existing Site Acreage t AG Farm Acreage K-12
1.0 Acres 7.0 Acres

10,560 SF
BUILDING t Total Building Area
LEGEND

X Agricultural Center
54
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements OS-US OS-RD S-UC S-EW S-SD PL-S3 S-FS3 S-FO3 ID-S1 S-W3 AS-PR S-LI4 BN-AS BN-AS BN-OH BN-GH O Site, Utility Services O Site, Roadway Development: Site, Utility Connections: Site, Earthwork: Site, Storm Drainage: Parking Lot, Equipment: New Site, Fencing Security: New Site, Fencing Ornamental: New Identication Devices, Site: School Sign Site, Walkways: New Aminal Science, Pasture: Railings Site, Landscape & Irrigation: New Building New, Animal Science Building New, Animal Science Building New, Ornamental Horticulture: Building New, Greenhouses: $53,200 $538,600 $64,800 $1,791,700 $289,600 $852,600 $30,400 $229,100 $32,900 $441,800 $277,100 $691,500 $2,383,600 $1,609,000 $1,065,700 $400,200 $10,751,800
| AGRICULTURAL CENTER MASTER PLAN
COST
N/A
$10,751,800
55
H A L L M A R K EXISTING
C H A R T E R |
HALLMARK CHARTER 2207 1/2 9th Ave. | Relocate to Del Rey Ave. & North Ave.
SCHOOL t Grade Level SITE t Existing Site Acreage t New Hallmark Site Acreage BUILDING t Total Building Area K-12
1.5 Acres 5.0 Acres

10,560 SF
LEGEND

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Administration Classrooms Classrooms Restrooms Computer Lab Music Administration Library Science Classroom Toilets Classroom Classroom Classroom Classroom Music Classroom Multi-Purpose Toilets Visual Arts Classroom
Master Plan
56
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements OS-US O Site, Utility Services OS-RD O Site, Roadway Development: S-D Site, Demolition: S-UC Site, Utility Connections: S-EW Site, Earthwork: S-SD Site, Storm Drainage: PL-S3 Parking Lot, Sta : New LZ-P3 Loading Zone, Parent: New PC-3 Play Courts: New S-SS3 Site, Shade Structures: New ID-S2 Identication Devices, Site: School Sign S-FS3 Site, Fencing Security: New S-FO3 Site, Fencing Ornamental: New S-W3 Site, Walkways: New BP-C3 Building Portables, Classrooms: BP-S3 Building Portables, Science: BP-M3 Building Portables, Music: BP-VA3 Building Portables, Visual Arts: BP-L3 Building Portables, Library: BP-A3 Building Portables, Administration: BM-MP3 Building Modular, Multi-Purpose: BP-T3 Building Portables, Toilets: Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding Need more data to determine Available State Funds N/A $2,840,500 $531,300 $445,700 $195,700 $1,365,600 $220,700 $1,323,200 $574,600 $185,400 $71,500 $32,900 $96,100 $93,300 $401,600 $917,200 $423,000 $542,500 $482,800 $521,200 $538,600 $816,800 $816,800 $13,437,000
| HALLMARK CHARTER MASTER PLAN
COST
$13,437,000
57
Q U A I L EXISTING
L A K E
E N V I R O N M E N T A L
C H A R T E R |
QUAIL LAKE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARTER 4087 N. Quail Lake Dr.

7.0 Acres
41,900 SF
LEGEND

A B C D P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 E F Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Multi-Purpose Kitchen Portable Classroom Portable Classroom Portable Classroom Portable Classroom Portable Classroom Portable Classroom Kindergarten/Classrooms Administration/Classrooms
Master Plan
58
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements BI-K3 TE-MP2 BI-T2 BI-C2 BI-MP2 BE-F1 BN-C BN-C LZ-B3 LZ-P3 PL-S3 S-LI1 PC-3 PG-2 PG-3 S-SS3 Building Interiors, Kitchen: Finishes + MEP Technology Equipment, Multi-Purpose: Replace Building Interior, Toilets: Finishes + MEP Building Interiors, Classrooms: New Finishes Building Interiors, Multi-Purpose: New Finishes Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint Building New, Classrooms Building New, Classrooms Loading Zone, Bus: New Loading Zone, Parent: New Parking Lot, Sta : New Site, Landscape & Irrigation: Soil Treatment Play Courts: New Play Grounds: Remove & Replace Play Grounds: New Site, Shade Structure: New $310,600 $32,900 $85,100 $332,200 $169,100 $139,700 $3,176,300 $3,460,900 $143,400 $143,400 $1,394,100 $186,100 $165,700 $28,400 $129,300 $107,200 $10,004,400
| QUAIL LAKE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARTER MASTER PLAN
COST
N/A
$10,004,400
59
R A S E N E G D E L R E YA C H AI D GE HM S Y C CH HOAOR LT E | R Kings | Existing Canyon School Unied Facilities School District Needs EXISTING
SANGER ACADEMY CHARTER 2207 9th Street
16.44 Acres
31,211 SF
LEGEND

A.1 A.2 A.3 B C D E F G H J K M D J N O Administration Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Multi-Purpose Music Room Classrooms/Lockers Classrooms Classrooms Classrooms Kindergarten Kindergarten Library/Intervention Administration Kindergarten Multi-Purpose
Master Plan
60
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
E X I S T I N G S C H O O L F AM C IA L IST T I EE S RN EP EL DS A N | SANGER | REEDLEY ACADEMY HIGH SCHOOL

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements BI-T3 TE-C3 BI-C3 BO-W3 BO-D3 BE-F1 ID-S1 LZ-P2 S-LI2 MS-D2 MB-E2 BP-C2 BN-K BN-MP PL-S3 S-SA2 PC-3 PG-3 S-SS4 PF-L1 PF-B3 S-LF1 BI-L3 BI-A3 BI-S3 BI-LS2 Building Interior, Toilets: Recongure Spaces $415,400 Technology Equipment, Classroom: New $234,800 Building Interiors, Classrooms: Finishes+MEP $1,123,100 Building Openings, Windows: Partial Replacement $284,800 Building Openings, Doors: Partial Replacement $131,400 Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint $147,700 Identifying Devices, Site: School Marque $32,900 Loading Zone, Parent: Remove & Replace $143,400 Site, Landscape & Irrigation: Grading $29,100 Mechanical Site, Distribution: Pipe Replacement $823,400 Mechanical Building, Equipment: Replacement $260,200 Building Portable, Classroom: Relocate $14,200 Building New, Kindergarten $1,287,100 Building New, Multi-Purpose $5,777,300 Parking Lot, Sta : New $716,800 Site, Student Ampitheater: Reconstruct $231,400 Play Courts: Relocate $222,700 Play Ground: Relocate $28,400 Site,Shade Structure: New $71,500 Play Fields, Layout: Recongure $65,900 Play Fields, Backstops: New $41,200 Site, Lighting Fields: New $129,300 Building Interiors, Library: Recongure Spaces $334,500 Building Interiors, Admin.: Recongure Spaces $158,300 Builidng Interiors, Science: Recongure Spaces $405,500 Building Interiors, Locker/Shower: New Finishes $360,700 $13,471,000 $95,298 $158,700 $418,066 $84,640 $1,774,036 $2,530,740
COST
MASTER PLAN
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding Current Available Funding 2014 State SFP Modernization Match (60%) 2016 State SFP Modernization Match (60%) 2018 State SFP Modernization Match (60%) 2019 State SFP Modernization Match (60%) Available State Funds
$10,940,260
61
E N R O L L M E N T
P R O J E C T I O N S
S E C T I O N
4 | Enrollment Projections
SECTION 4 | ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS

Introduction
The Enrollment Projections and Future School Needs 2012-2021 report, prepared by Odell Planning & Research, Inc., serves as the basis for Section 4. The report projects District enrollment for the next ten years and makes recommendations as to the number, type, and general location of the school facilities needed to accommodate projected growth. This section presents a summarized version of the report.
TABLE 4.1 Projected Enrollment 2021-2022 School Year

SCHOOLS Sanger Area Elementary Southeast Fresno Area K-6 Rural Area Elementary Washington Academic Middle Sanger High Charter Other* Total District Enrollment Projection** 201112 2,453 1,165 1,037 1,578 2,694 1,604 342 10,873 202122 2,777 2,087 1,243 2,111 3,399 1,930 426 13,973 AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATES 1.25% 7.24% 1.83% 2.95% 2.35% 1.87% 2.23% 2.54%
Enrollment Projections
Table 4.1 summarizes the projected enrollment growth in the District for the next 10 years by school type. Chart 4.1 shows the projected enrollment growth in the Sanger Unied School District for the next 10 years. Sanger Unied K-12 enrollment is projected to increase from 10,873 in 2011-12 to 13,973 in 2021-22. This is an increase of 3,100 students and an average growth rate of 2.54 percent per year.
*Other includes Independent Study, Continuation, Community Day and SDC **Includes all District students
CHART 4.1 Sum of Schools Total District K-12
64
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
E N R O L L M E N T P R O J E C T I O N S | Sanger Unied School District
Area-Specic Projections and Future School Needs Rural Schools

The schools serving the more rural areas of the District are Fairmont, Del Rey, and Centerville Schools. Each of these schools is projected to be below its District-defined operational capacity for the entire tenyear projection period. Therefore, no new rural-serving elementary school capacity will be needed.
Charter Schools
The three charter schools Hallmark, Sanger Academy, and Quail Lake each have unique features and facilities issues. Hallmark Charter operates as an independent study program and a significant portion of the students reside outside the District. As such, Hallmark Charter has no traditional school facilities needs. Sanger Academy Charter has no defined attendance area, primarily serves students that reside in the District, and is projected to be above operational capacity beginning in 2014. However, as a charter school, Sanger Academy has the option of limiting its enrollment to space available. Any students denied admission because of insufficient capacity can be accommodated in the projected excess capacity in the Sanger area K-5 schools. Quail Lake Environmental Charter has no defined attendance area except that residents of the Quail Lake development are given preferential status for admission. Quail Lake Charter is currently operating above District-defined operational capacity and will continue to be above operational capacity for the ten-year projection period. However, the school has the option of limiting enrollment to space available; and District resident students denied admission can be accommodated in other District elementary schools with the closest school being Fairmont Elementary.
65
S E C T I O N
Sanger Area Elementary Schools

The Sanger area elementary schools include Jackson, Jeerson, Lincoln, Wilson, Madison, and Reagan Elementary Schools. Projected enrollment for these schools is shown on Chart 4.2. As a group, the six elementary schools are projected to be well below operational capacity for the entire ten-year projection period. With minor attendance area adjustments, all six schools could all be below operational capacities for the ten-year projection period. Therefore, no new elementary schools are projected as being needed in the Sanger area.
CHART 4.2 Sanger Area Elementary Schools
66
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
Southeast Fresno Area Elementary Schools

The elementary schools serving southeast Fresno area are Sequoia, John Wash, and Lone Star Elementary Schools. Projected enrollment for these schools is shown on Chart 4.3. As a group, the three southeast Fresno schools will exceed their combined operational capacity in 2015 and are projected to be 537 above operational capacity at the end of the ten-year projection period. Based on the projection, an additional elementary school will be needed in the southeast Fresno area by approximately 2016. However, the timing for an additional elementary school may be impacted by the potential need for an additional middle school and the fact that the District is in the process of acquiring a combined middle school/high school site in the southeast Fresno area.
CHART 4.3 Southeast Fresno Area K-6
67
S E C T I O N
Middle School
Washington Academic Middle School (WAMS) is the only middle school in the District. Projected enrollment for WAMS is shown on Chart 4.4. WAMS is projected to exceed its District-dened operational capacity in 2013 and be approximately 500 students above operational capacity by the end of the ten-year projection period. The timing for a new middle school is dependent on several factors: 1) grade level conguration; 2) shared facilities use and program integration with a future high school; 3) and timing of high school facilities needs. For example, if the school is planned to operate as a grades 6-8 school and serves the grade 6 students that now attend the southeast Fresno area K-6 schools, a future middle school in the southeast Fresno area could have an enrollment of between 700 and 800 in 2016. Under this scenario, a new middle school should be constructed in southeast Fresno by the 2016-17 school year, if not earlier.
CHART 4.4 Washington Academic Middle School
68
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
High School
Sanger High School (WAMS) is the only comprehensive high school in the District. Projected enrollment for Sanger High is shown on Chart 4.5. Sanger High School is currently operating above its District-defined operational capacity and is projected to be 969 above operational capacity by the end of the ten-year projection period. The District is in the process of acquiring a future high school/middle school site in the southeast area of the District to meet the needs of existing and future southeast Fresno and southern Clovis area growth. In part, the timing for a new southeast Fresno area high school is dependent on factors relating to the timing for a future middle school discussed previously and the extent to which the middle and high school programs share facilities and have program integration. It is probable that some type of phased construction will be required to make the construction of the high school and middle school feasible, as initially there will be insufficient enrollment for a full school of either configuration. Nonetheless, by 2016 it is probable that the combined grades 6-8 middle school and high school potential enrollment for a southeast Fresno area campus would be 1,400 or greater. Therefore, 2016 is a reasonable target date for the addition of some type of middle/high school capacity to relieve both WAMS and Sanger High.
CHART 4.5 Sanger High School
69
N E W
S C H O O L
F A C I L I T Y
N E E D S
S E C T I O N
5 | New School Facility Needs
SECTION 5 | NEW SCHOOL FACILITY NEEDS

As student enrollment changes each year, the District must be in a position to understand enrollment trends and react to the impact projected student enrollment increases or decreases will have on the Districts ability to adequately house its students in quality facilities. Because the enrollment projections over the 10 year life of this FMP referenced in Section 4 | Enrollment Projections indicates that the District will not have sucient student capacity, it is projected the District will be required to build new schools. Since new facilities take time to plan, the timing of when a facility is needed is critical. In addition to projecting student enrollment over the next 10 years, this FMP identies the communities where these changes in enrollment are potentially to occur, and when the unmet student housing needs will require new facilities to house these additional students. This data informs the District as to when to time the need for new facilities. This master plan identies a housing strategy, and the types and sizes of the new schools. Table 5.1 summarizes the new facility needs required based on the Odell Planning & Research, Enrollment Projections and Future School Needs, 2012-2021 report. As the new facility needs were dened, the associated capital costs were estimated, gathered and dened. The capital needs for the new school facilities are based upon the anticipated project costs for the forecasted year of 2016. These costs include the construction costs (hard costs) and other non-direct costs (soft costs). These facilities were estimated in the value of todays dollars (2012), and then escalated to include ination forces to 2016.
72
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
N E W S C H O O L F A C I L I T Y N E E D S | Sanger Unied School District
Table 5.1 Enrollment Growth and Facility Requirements Study

Project Project Development Costs Elementary School Purchase Site Site Acquisition, Environmental Documents, or Other Planning Costs Develop Architectural Plans & Specications Middle School Site Purchase Site Acquisition, Environmental Documents, or Other Planning Costs Develop Architectural Plans & Specications High School Site Purchase Site Acquisition, Environmental Documents, or Other Planning Costs Develop Architectural Plans & Specications Total Project Development Needs Construction Project Costs Elementary School Middle School High School Total Construction Project Needs TOTAL NEW SCHOOL FACILITY NEEDS $20,994,000 $39,520,000 $86,455,000 $146,969,000* $165,768,000 $5,880,000 $713,000 $4,565,000 $18,799,000 $2,520,000 $287,000 $2,260,000 $1,100,000 $152,000 $1,322,000 Budget
Note: The capital needs for the new school facility projects are based upon the anticipated project costs for the forecasted year the facility is required. These costs include the construction costs (hard costs) and other non direct costs (soft costs). These projects were estimated in the value of 2016 dollars.
73
D I S T R I C T
F A C I L I T I E S
N E E D S
S E C T I O N
6 | District Facilities Needs
SECTION 6 | DISTRICT FACILITIES NEEDS

District Facilities Needs
The District Facilities Needs are non-school specific improvements. The identified improvements are operationally efficiency need orientated and based in part on the Districts Facilities Crisis and Management Assessment Team (FCMAT) report. Table 6.1 lists improvements that have been identified as District Project District Oce Transportation Yard/Bus Maintenance Warehouse Maintenance and Operations Tom Flores Stadium New Stadium TOTAL DISTRICT FACILITIES NEEDS
Table 6.1 District Facilities Needs

Budget $3,216,000 $8,204,300 $3,463,100 $2,906,300 $3,564,900 $13,250,000 $34,604,600
The capital needs for the District facilities needs are based upon the anticipated project costs for the forecasted year the facility is required. These costs include the construction costs (hard costs) and other non direct costs (soft costs). These improvements were estimated in the value of 2014 dollars.
76
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
D I S T R I C T F A C I L I T I E S N E E D S | Sanger Unied School District
DISTRICT
The following graphic site plans illustrate the existing District facility sites and an accompanying draft conceptual vision. The draft conceptual vision is intended to identify in graphic form the list of improvements and their associated budgets. The draft concepts are not intended to be the nal design solution, but rather to illustrate the improvements that would be suitable for the District facility. Each of the sites will have a list of Proposed Improvements and an associated project budget in 2014 dollars. The Master Plan Improvement Total is the sum of the individual improvements. This gure then represents the nancial need necessary to fund the identied improvements. The listing of the Proposed State Funding identies the year and nancial amount of the potential modernization eligibility grants. The Available State Funds is the sum of potential State funded grants. The Local Funds Required is the dierence between the Master Plan Improvement Total and the Available State Funds, and represents the adjusted nancial need.
Table of contents
School District Oce Transportation Yard/Bus Maintenance Warehouse Maintenance and Operations Tom Flores Stadium Page 78 80 82 82 84
77
D I S T R I C T EXISTING
O F F I C E | District Facilities Needs
DISTRICT OFFICE 1905 7th St.

SITE t Site Acreage Existing Kings River Taft BUILDING t Total Building Area 4.0 Acres 12,886 SF
LEGEND

A P1 P2 P3 P4 A B P5 P6 Administration Building Administration Administration Administration / Print Shop Administration Administration District Oces District Oces District Oces
Master Plan
78
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
DISTRIC T FACILITIES NEEDS

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements BE-F3 ID-S1 ID-B3 PL-1 MB-E3 BI-A4 BI-A3 BO-W4 BO-D4 BE-F1 BE-R1 BI-A3 BA-IT BP-T Building Exteriors, Finishes: Replace Identication Devices, Site: Marque Sign Identication Devices, Building: Signs Parking Lot: Seal & Strip Mechanical Building, Equipment: Replacement Building Interiors, Admin.: Recongure Spaces Building Interiors, Admin.: New Finishes + MEP Building Openings, Windows: Partial Replacement Building Openings, Doors: Partial Replacement Building Exteriors, Finishes: Clean & Paint Building Exterior, Roof: Maintanence Building Interiors, Admin: Recongure Spaces Building Addition, Technology Building Portables, Toilets: New $344,400 $32,900 $26,600 $17,500 $120,100 $376,500 $162,300 $62,700 $156,500 $47,400 $142,300 $834,000 $709,000 $183,800
| DISTRICT OFFICE MASTER PLAN
COST
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding Not eligible Available State Funds
$3,216,000
N/A
$3,216,000
79
T R A N S P O R TAT I O N EXISTING
YA R D / B U S
M A I N T E N A N C E | District Facilities Needs
TRANSPORTATION YARD Major Cross Streets: Academy Ave. / Muscat Ave. TRANSPORTATION YARD
2.9 Acres
1,600 SF
BUS MAINTENANCE 1705 10th St. | Relocate to Transportation Yard

1.5 Acres
6,348 SF
LEGEND
MASTER PLAN BUILDING DESIGNATIONS Existing Transportation Yard

100 Oce (trailer) 200 Lounge (trailer) 300 Restroom (trailer)
BUS MAINTENANCE
Existing Bus Maintenance

100 Bus Warehouse 200 Bus Warehouse 300 Carport
Master Plan
100 Oce, Lounge, Restroom, Bus Warehouse
80
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Phase 1 - Proposed Improvements BN-BM Building New, Bus Maintenance BN-A Building New, Administrative OS-RD O Site, Roadway Development S-DI Site, Demolition Improvements S-UC Site, Utility Connections S-EW Site, Earthwork PL-B4 Parking Lot, Bus: New PL-S4 Parking Lot, Sta : New S-FS3 Site, Fencing Security: New S-LI4 Site, Landscape & Irrigation: New Master Plan Improvement Phase 1 Total Proposed State Funding Not eligible Available State Funds N/A
| TRANSPORTATION YARD/BUS MAINTENANCE MASTER PLAN
COST
$1,662,800 $1,134,400 $115,500 $115,900 $1,092,900 $583,500 $2,425,000 $925,700 $58,300 $90,300 $8,204,300
$8,204,300
81
WA R E H O U S E / M A I N T E N A N C E EXISTING
A N D
O P E R A T I O N S | District Facilities Needs
WAREHOUSE 1020 N St. | Relocate: to Transportation Yard

SITE t Site Acreage BUILDING t Total Building Area 0.75 Acres 4,800 SF
WAREHOUSE
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS 1705 10th Street | Relocate: to Transportation Yard

0.53 Acres
10,118 SF
LEGEND

100 Warehouse T Maintenance R Maintenance
Master Plan
200 Warehouse 300 Maintenance
82
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Phase 2 - Proposed Improvements - Warehouse BN-W Building New, Warehouse OS-RD O Site, Roadway Development S-DH Site, Demolition Hazardous Material S-UC Site, Utility Connections S-EW Site, Earthwork PL-W4 Parking Lot, Warehouse: New ID-S1 Identication Device, Site: Site Sign S-FS3 Site, Fencing Security: New S-LI4 Site, Landscape & Irrigation: New P-SD Plumbing, Site Distribution FS-D4 Fire Sprinkler, Distribution E-SD4 Electrical, Site Distribution: New Master Plan Improvement Phase 2 Total
| WAREHOUSE/MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS MASTER PLAN
COST
$1,009,600 $18,100 $58,600 $147,700 $302,800 $1,580,200 $32,900 $78,700 $21,900 $65,000 $27,700 $119,900 $3,463,100
Phase 3 - Proposed Improvements - Maintenance and Operations BN-MO Building New, Maintenance & Operations $2,309,500 S-EW Site, Earthwork $26,500 PL-B4 Parking Lot, Bus: New $288,300 PL-S4 Parking Lot, Sta : New $72,400 ID-B1 Identication Device, Building: ADA $5,300 S-FS3 Site, Fencing Security: New $37,500 S-LI4 Site, Landscape & Irrigation: New $10,000 P-SD Plumbing, Site Distribution $47,900 FS-D4 Fire Sprinklers, Distribution: New $20,400 E-SD4 Electrical, Site Distribution: New $88,500 Master Plan Improvement Phase 3 Total $2,906,300 Master Plan Improvement Phases 2 & 3 Total Proposed State Funding Not eligible Available State Funds N/A $6,369,400
$6,369,400
* Cost does not include purchase of additional site acreage.
83
T O M EXISTING
F L O R E S
S T A D I U M | District Facilities Needs
TOM FLORES STADIUM 1705 10th Street

1.5 Acres
1,713 SF
LEGEND

V V1 Y Z Toilets Snack Bar Lockers Toilets
Master Plan (District Oce)

AA BB Snack Bar Toilets
84
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N

FACILITY NEEDS:
Proposed Improvements BI-F3 BI-F1 BO-D3 BE-F1 BE-R1 IS-B BN-SB BN-T BE-F1 OS-RD S-DI S-UC S-EW ID-S1 ID-S2 PL-S3 S-FS3 S-FO3 S-W3 S-LI Building Interior, Finishes: New + MEP Building Interior, Finishes: Clean & Paint Buiding Opening, Doors: Partial Replacement Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint Builidng Exterior, Roong: Maintenance Identication Device, Site: Buildings Building New: Snack Bar Building New, Toilets Building Exterior, Finishes: Clean & Paint O Site, Roadway Development Site, Demolition Improvements Site, Utility Connections Site, Earthwork Identication Devices, Site: Facility Marque Identication Devices, Site: Waynding Parking Lot, Sta : New Site, Fencing Security: New Site, Fencing Ornamental: New Site, Walkways: New Site, Landscape & Irrigation: $108,300 $20,100 $16,400 $10,100 $38,500 $3,700 $593,000 $576,900 $10,100 $146,100 $341,800 $293,200 $151,300 $98,700 $5,300 $753,500 $34,400 $89,400 $179,700 $94,400 $3,564,900
| TOM FLORES STADIUM MASTER PLAN
COST
Master Plan Improvement Total Proposed State Funding Not eligible Available State Funds
N/A
$3,564,900
85
F I N A N C I N G
T H E
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
S E C T I O N
7 | Financing the Facilities Master Plan
Section 7 | FINANCING THE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN

Introduction
Financing a Facilities Master Plan requires an aggressive plan that takes into consideration all possible funding options including, but not limited to, local funding options, general obligation bonds, the State school building program (Senate Bill 50), federal funding opportunities, grants for capital facility projects, and the inclusion of current capital funds available to the District. This section of the report will summarize the Districts capital funds currently available, estimate their eligible State capital facility funds for new construction and modernization projects, and identify the estimated proceeds they would receive based on three dierent general obligation bond measure scenarios, along with the impact of the each scenario on property tax rates. Further, this section will summarize other State and federal programs that provide funding for capital facility programs.
Developer Fee Funds

The District currently has $0 in uncommitted developer fee funds and has $0 in developer fee funds to support this FMP.
Capital Facility Funds Available in the next 10 years

t t Uncommitted capital facility funds Developer Fee funds $11,472,937 $0 $11,472,937
Total Capital Facility Funds Available
Funds Currently Available for Capital Projects

Because of excellent planning along with aggressively pursuing State capital facility funds, the SUSD was able to complete a majority of the projects included in the previous capital Facilities Master Plan without having to expend the total amount of capital funds available. As a result, these capital funds are available to be used for partially funding the existing and new construction projects highlighted in this report. The following is a summary of the capital facility funds that will be available to the District during the next 10 years that do not require voter approval.
Capital Facility Fund Balance

The District currently has $11,472,937 in uncommitted capital funds that will be available to fund improvements highlighted in this FMP.
88
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
F I N A N C I N G T H E F A C I L I T I E S M A S T E R P L A N | Sanger Unied School District
State School Building Eligibility Introduction

The State School Facility Program (SFP) provides funding grants for school districts to acquire school sites, construct new school facilities, or modernize existing school facilities. Although there are several boutique programs included in the SFP, the two major funding types available to school districts are the New Construction and Modernization programs. The New Construction grant provides funding on a 50/50 State and local match basis and the Modernization grant provides funding on a 60/40 State and local match basis. The remainder of the SFP programs are summarized under Additional State Facility Programs in this section.
Funding Sources for the SFP

Funding for the SFP comes from statewide general obligation bonds approved by California voters. The State Allocation Board (SAB) is responsible for determining the allocation of State funds used for the SFP. The SAB is comprised of ten members, including three State Senators, three State Assembly Members, the Superintendent of Public Instruction, the Director of the Department of Finance, the Director of the Department of General Services and one person appointed by the Governor. The Oce of Public School Construction (OPSC) is sta to the SAB and is responsible for verifying applicant school districts eligibility, processing funding applications and administering all SAB programs including preparing regulations, policies and procedures for approval by the SAB. The OPSC also prepares the SAB meeting agendas, which serve as source documents used by the State Controllers Oce for fund releases and as historical records for all SAB decisions. Because there has not been a State school bond measure since 2006, most of the State authorization for facility programs has been exhausted and will denitely be exhausted by the time the SUSD will have its matching funds for new construction and modernization projects. It is unlikely a State school bond measure will be placed on the November 2012 statewide election ballot. The next possible State school bond measure will be in June or November of 2014. The eligibility amounts listed on the following pages are based on the current SFP, which is subject to modication with new legislation and/or regulation changes by the State
89
S e c t i o n
Allocation Board (SAB).
New Construction Eligibility for SUSD

The SFP New Construction program funding may be used to purchase and/or build new schools or classrooms for eligible K-12 students. Eligibility for this program is based upon enrollment projections and seating capacity in the District. The District must provide an equal match to the States contribution for projects. New construction eligibility is calculated annually based on the October enrollment of the district. Based on a preliminary review of the Districts enrollment, the District is eligible for approximately $38,134,633 in State new construction funds. Table 7.1 provides a more detailed summary of the Districts New Construction Eligibility.
90
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
Table 7.1 New Construction Eligibility

Pupil Grants K-6 2011/12 10-Year Draft Projection Baseline Capacity Adjustment* 2011/12 Total Draft Eligibility Calculation 2011/12 Total Draft Eligibility (Net) Project Drawdown Project Number 50/62414-00-001 50/62414-00-002 50/62414-00-003 50/62414-00-004 50/62414-00-002 50/62414-00-003 50/62414-00-004 50/62414-00-006 50/62414-00-007 50/62414-00-008 50/62414-00-009 50/62414-00-010 50/62414-00-011 50/62414-00-012 50/62414-00-013 50/62414-00-004 Total Project Drawdown Net Remaining Eligibility 50% State Share 50% District Match Total Estimated Project Funding Notes: t Existing School Building Capacity from SAB 50-02 provided by OPSC t Utilizes pupil grant amounts as approved by the State Allocaton Board on January 25, 2012 t Four Unfunded Approvals of 10/6/10 were provided Final Apportionments on 12/14/11 t Based upon the timing of the drawdowns, Projects -001, -003, and -004 would not have had eligibility in the 7-8 Grade category. Use of K-6 or 9-12 Grants would have been available starting in March 2003. Site New Elementary (Quail Lake) John Wash (Design) Lone Star (Design) New Elementary (Reagan) (Design) John Wash (Adjusted) Lone Star (Adjusted) New Elementary (Reagan) (Adjusted) Sanger High Quail Lake Sanger Academy Charter Lone Star John Wash (Unfunded) Jeerson (Unfunded) Fairmont (Unfunded) Lincoln (Unfunded) New Elementary (Sequoia) (Unfunded) SAB Date 1/26/00 5/28/03 5/28/03 5/28/03 5/25/05 5/25/05 5/27/07 5/28/08 6/25/08 6/25/08 6/25/08 10/6/10* 10/6/10* 10/6/10* 10/6/10* 7/12/11 (219) (150) (150) (403) (25) 75 (172) (135) (16) (25) (50) (50) (50) (50) (50) (550) (2,020) 2,039 $19,278,745 $19,278,745 $38,557,490 (246) 0 0 (124) 0 (27) 124 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (273) 0 $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,476 $18,776,196 $18,776,196 $37,552,392 0 0 0 (5) 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 $79,692 $79,692 $159,384 (465) (150) (150) (532) (25) 48 (43) (135) (16) (25) (50) (50) (50) (50) (50) (550) (2,293) 3,515 $38,134,633 $38,134,633 $76,269,266 7,849 (3,790) 4,059 4,059 7-8 2,179 (2,862) (683) 0 9-12 3,906 (2,430) 1,476 1,476 Non-Severe 119 (120) (1) 0 Severe 3 0 3 3 5,535 Total 14,056 (9,202)
91
S e c t i o n
Modernization
SFP Modernization program funding is available for the renovation or replacement of existing buildings. This funding may not be used to increase the capacity at a site. Modernization eligibility is site-specic and is generated by permanent buildings over 25 years of age and portable buildings over 20 years of age. The District currently has modernization eligibility totaling approximately $7,293,016 in base grant State funding through 2011 and approximately $24,908,546 through 2023. This modernization eligibility includes a draw down for the projects approved by the SAB. The District will need to update its modernization eligibility annually for each school site in order to maximize its modernization funding during the life of this FMP. Table 7.2 provides a more detailed summary of the Districts 10 year modernization eligibility analysis.
Table 7.2 10 year Modernization Eligibility Summary Sheet | Updated to 2012 Pupil Grant Amounts
School Site
Centerville Elementary Del Rey Elementary Fairmont Elementary Jackson Elementary Jeerson Elementary Lincoln Elementary Lone Star Elementary Madison Elementary Ronald W. Reagan Elementary* Sequoia Elementary* John S. Wash Elementary Wilson Elementary Washington Academic MS (Old) Sanger High (Old) Sanger High (New)* Kings River High (Cont)/Taft High Community Day*** Hallmark Charter** Quail Lake Environmental Charter*
Estimated Current Funding Available
2012 Funding 2013 Funding 2014 Funding 2015 Funding 2016 Funding 2017 Funding 2018 Funding 2019 Funding 2020 Funding 2021 Funding 2022 Funding 2023 Funding
Total Funding
$0 $0 $565,686 $969,822 $0 $0 $0 $1,445,214 $0 $0 $1,210,000 $480,000 $95,298 $1,494,231 $0 $1,032,765 $0 $0 $7,293,016
$344,258 $205,686 $776,000 $998,616 $91,254 $84,184 $121,474 $950,000 $270,000 $237,344 $227,274 $374,954 $137,748
$513,712
$1,268,204
$173,968 $886,986 $62,600 $223,336
$440,290
$158,700 $200,825
$418,066 $176,858
$1,135,000 $84,640 $326,016
$1,774,036 $4,953,501
TOTAL
$0
$1,268,204
$565,211
$2,724,616
$891,836
$326,016
$2,811,218
$3,634,638
$0
$0
$440,290
$4,953,501
$857,970 $776,000 $2,098,586 $1,895,538 $1,261,940 $1,590,026 $950,000 $1,938,550 $0 $0 $1,210,000 $1,615,000 $2,530,740 $7,151,431 $0 $1,032,765 $0 $0 $0 $24,908,546
* **
These schools are newer and do not yet generate modernization eligibility Hallmark Charter consists of facilities that were moved to the site from other locations. Additional data needed to determine potential eligibility.
*** Community Day is housed in leased facilities, therefore no eligibility is generated. Notes: t All dollar amounts are listed as the State's share . t All dollar amounts are based on the current adjusted Modernization Grant Amounts passed by the SAB eective as of 1/1/2012. As future modernization grant amounts change, funding may change. t Future year eligibility estimates assume no increase in enrollment. Should enrollment increase, eligibility may increase.
92
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
Additional State Facility Programs Summary of State Funding Eligibility

t t State funds for new construction projects State funds for modernization projects $38,134,633 $24,908,546 $63,043,179 The following is a brief summary of funding opportunities available to school districts for which the SUSD could be eligible for depending upon the District securing matching funds or meeting eligibility requirements.
Total State Funding Eligibility
Overcrowding Relief Grant (ORG) Program

The ORG program is available to districts that have school sites that exceed a certain pupil density based on 2005/06 October enrollments. In order to reduce densities and relieve overcrowding, districts are required to remove portable classrooms from classroom use and replace them with an equal amount of permanent capacity. The eligibility for this program is based on a calculation of existing portables and does not utilize traditional SFP new construction eligibility. Districts who submit applications are provided funds based upon density ratios, from most dense sites to least dense.
Charter School Facility Program

This program allows charter schools with preliminary apportionments to renovate existing facilities or to construct new facilities. To qualify for funding, a charter must be deemed nancially sound by the California School Finance Authority. Charter schools can access this funding directly or through the school district in which the site will be located, and they have four years to convert a preliminary apportionment to a nal apportionment. The school district in which the charter school is physically located no longer requires SFP new construction eligibility; however, new construction eligibility will be adjusted by the number of district unhoused pupils the CSFP project will serve (as determined by the District). At this time the OPSC is not accepting any additional preliminary apportionment applications and there are no future funding rounds planned. However, if additional funds become available due to project rescissions, additional rounds may be opened. It is important to monitor this program regularly.
Facility Hardship
This program is designed to provide funds to repair or replace facilities that have either an imminent health or safety threat, or for facilities that have been lost due to a natural disaster such as a ood, re, or earthquake. This program requires extensive agency-supported documentation and special approval from the SAB.
93
S e c t i o n
Additional State Facility Programs continued Financial Hardship

Financial hardship assistance is available for districts that cannot provide all or part of their funding share of a School Facility Program project. In order to receive nancial hardship assistance, a district must have made all reasonable eorts to raise local funding and must also demonstrate that it is unable to contribute all or a portion of the matching share requirement. In order a new construction or modernization project to be considered a nancial hardship application, the district must have an approved nancial hardship status prior to submitting the new construction or modernization project application. In order to be eligible to apply for nancial hardship status the district must meet the following legal requirements: levy the maximum develop fee allowable and demonstrate local eort to raise facility revenue having bonded indebtedness of at least 60 percent of its capacity or the district bonding capacity is less than $5 million or the district had a successful registered voter bond election for at least the maximum allowed under Proposition 39 within the previous 2 years or other evidence which demonstrates that all reasonable local eorts have been made to secure the districts matching share requirements for the new construction and/or modernizations projects. In addition to the above, in order for the district to receive nancial hardship assistance, all local facility funds available to the district must be counted as part of the districts local match. Once approved for nancial hardship, new construction and modernization project cost must fall within State allowances. Thus, this method of funding works best for modernization projects because districts nd it very dicult to construct an adequate new facility based on nancial hardship funding.
Career Technical Education Facilities Program (CTEFP)

CTEFP grants are available to school districts operating a comprehensive high school, and provide up to $3 million per project for new construction of Career Technical facilities and up to $1.5 million per project for the modernization of Career Technical facilities. Projects may consist of equipment only. Traditional SFP eligibility is not required and will not be adjusted for these projects. The CDE must rst approve the districts Career Technical Education Plan and proposed project. Districts must provide the anticipated costs and square footage to determine the funding amount.
High Performance Incentive (HPI) Grant

The HPI program provides funding on a sliding scale point system based on the Collaborative for High Performance Schools (CHPS) standards. The project must meet the pre-requisites in each of the High Performance Rating Criteria (HPRC) and will receive a score based on the number of HPRC components that are included in the project. The Division of the State Architect (DSA) will review the project and will verify the nal score, which will in turn determine the HPI grant amount. Based on the score, the base grant could increase from approximately 2-10%. Regulation changes, which took eect in early 2011, provide Base Incentive Grant (BIG) funding in addition to the percentage increase for the point score received. The BIG for new schools is $150,000 and $250,000 for additions and modernization projects. All funds received for high performance must be used on high performance related costs. In addition, the school district must have a resolution on le that demonstrates support for the HPI grant request as well as the intent to incorporate high performance features in future facilities projects.
Joint-Use Program (AB 16)

The Joint-Use Program allows districts to obtain funding from a joint-use partner and a match from the State in order to build joint-use projects (divided into two categories). The program has a 50/50 funding split, with the State providing up to $2 million per project, depending upon grade level, site characteristics, and project scope. The joint-use partner must provide at least 50% of the local match, unless a districts bond language meets the requirements of the education code. Facilities that may qualify for joint-use funding are gymnasiums, libraries, multi-purpose rooms, child care facilities and teacher education facilities.
94
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
Federal Programs New Construction Additional Grant for District-Owned Site Acquisition Cost (AB 401)
This program allows districts to apply for additional new construction funding if the district is vacating non-school space that has been productively used for at least the past ve years, such as administration space, and placing students into the vacated facility. In a much more limited capacity than the State of California, the Federal government has provided some facility funding and nancing options for California school districts. A summary of some of these options are outlined below.
Safe Routes to Schools

There are two separate Safe Routes to Schools programs administered by CalTrans. There is the State program know as SR2S and the Federal program known as SRTS. The programs aim to improve and enhance the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists by improving related infrastructure such as sidewalks, trails, trac calming/control devices, and bike paths. SR2S: To date there have been nine program cycles for the California Safe Routes to School Program. A 10th cycle was recently announced on December 20, 2011, with a target funding amount of $45 million. Applications for Cycle 10 are due on March 30, 2012. Typically, applicants must be any incorporated city or a county within the state of California. SR2S applications should be submitted to the attention of your Caltrans District Local Assistance Engineer. SRTS: To date there have been two program cycles for the Federal Safe Routes to School Program. The projects list for Cycle 3 was approved on October 17, 2011, for $66 million in Federal funding.
New Construction Additional Grant for Replaced Facilities (AB 801)

This program provides funding for the replacement cost of single-story buildings that are demolished
Williams Settlement
School Facilities Needs Assessment Grant Program: Funding for this program is available to schools ranked in deciles 1 through 3, as identied by performance on the 2003 Academic Performance Index (API). Under the School Facilities Needs Assessment Grant Program, eligible schools received funding to conduct a one time assessment of facilities. Each eligible school received $10 per pupil (based on October 2003 enrollment) to complete the review, with a minimum grant amount of $7,500. Emergency Repair Program: Funding for this program was available to schools ranked in deciles 1 through 3, as identied by performance on the 2006 Academic Performance Index (API). Funds are allocated for qualifying emergency repairs made to existing building systems or structural components that are broken and not functioning properly and that pose a health and safety threat to pupils and sta. Emergency Repair Program funds are made available through the Budget Act and the program will be active until the $800 million associated with this program is exhausted. Currently there are more projects included on the workload list than funds available for the program and the OPSC is no longer accepting applications.
Qualied School Construction Bonds (QSCB)

QSCBs are authorized by the federal government through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. The bonds provide federal tax credits for bondholders in lieu of interest in order to signicantly reduce an issuers cost of borrowing. The ARRA provides for an allocation to each state, along with separate allocations for large school districts.
Qualied Zone Academy Bonds

The QZAB Program provides interest-free school renovation bonds for sites that house educational programs that strive to improve and promote graduation rates and job skills in partnership with interested private entities. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act increased the QZAB program from $400 million a year to $1.4 billion for 2009 and $1.4 billion for 2010. This program provides the bondholder with a federal tax credit in lieu of a cash interest payment. As the federal government is providing the interest payment, the district is typically only responsible for repaying the value of the bond.
95
S e c t i o n
Federal Programs continued Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBs)

CREBs are used primarily by public sector entities to nance qualied renewable energy facilities including: a wind facility, a closed loop biomass facility, an open-loop biomass facility, a geothermal or solar energy facility, a small irrigation power facility, a landll gas facility, a trash combustion facility, a qualied hydropower facility, or a marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy facility. CREBs are authorized by the federal government through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. The Recovery Act authorized an additional $1.6 billion of Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBs), which help facilitate the nance of renewable facilities. This sum raises the previously capped $800 million ceiling on CREB issuances, and raises the maximum allowable issuance to $2.4 billion dollars. These bonds function as tax credit bonds which allow investors to receive federal tax credits in lieu of the payment of a portion of the interest on the bond. CREBs tax credits are treated as taxable income for the bondholder. Applications must be led by issuers with the Internal Revenue Service when the CREB window is opened. The most recent issuance expired on December 31, 2010.
Energy Eciency Retrot Loan Program

Using PG&Es Energy Eciency Retrot Loan Program, or On-Bill Financing (OBF), the District is able to access nancing at a 0% interest. The monthly payment on the Districts energy payment will be a payment neutral experience. In other words, the monthly energy savings will pay for energy ecient retrot project costs.
Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM)

PDM funds flow from FEMA to individual states and are administered in California by the California Emergency Management Agency (CalEMA). The program was created when the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 amended the Stafford Act to provide a funding mechanism that is not dependent on a presidential disaster declaration. The estimated amount to California for the 2011 fiscal year is $200,000,000. PDM funding requires at least a 25% match (75% federal share of project cost). Grants are available for the creation of Local Hazard Mitigation Plans (LHMPs) and for the implementation of mitigation projects prior to a disaster event. To apply for funding, applicants must complete a Notice of Interest (NOI) available on the CalEMA website. Eligible applicants who submit an NOI for an eligible activity will be given the code to access the Federal eGrants system to complete an application. School districts and Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) with LHMPs, which are part of a multijurisdictional LHMPs, are eligible applicants. Please note, the scal year 2011 Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) application period opened on June 1, 2010 and is currently closed. However, this program operates in an annual funding cycles based on the scal year. Please note, funds are allocated when FEMA approves the application and they must be used within 18 months of FEMA approval. 96
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
General Obligation Bonds Introduction

General Obligation Bonds are the major source of local revenue for capital facility projects. From June 1978 with the passage of Proposition 13, until June 1986, school districts were prohibited from even placing a general obligation bond measure on the election ballot for voters to determine if they desired to use this alternative as a local source for funding capital facility projects. However, in June 1986, California voters approved Proposition 46 that amended Proposition 13 to allow local school districts to place general obligation bond measures on the election ballot for consideration by the voters of the district. Passage of Proposition 46 bonds require a 2/3 (66.7%) majority vote for passage. With the passage of Proposition 39 in November 2000, school districts now have another option for placing general obligation bond measures on the election ballot for consideration by district voters. This type of bond measure is attractive to school districts because it only requires a 55 percent majority vote for passage. However, if districts select this alternative, there are several factors districts must consider and implement if the bond measure is to be successful. Although both bond measure options are available to school districts, most school districts select Proposition 39 bonds because of the lower passage rate. The following is a summary of Proposition 46 and 39 bond measures, followed by Table 7.2 which summarizes the dierences between the two bond measures.
t t t t t
Summary of Prop. 46 & 39 / AB1908 Proposition 46

June 1986 State Primary Election Reinstated ability for voters to approve general obligation bonds with 2/3rds (66.7%) voter approval Limitations on Outstanding Indebtedness 2.5% of Assessed Valuation (AV) for unied school districts 1.25% of AV for elementary and high school districts
Proposition 39
t t t Approved by voters in November 2000 Reduced bond measure passage vote from 2/3 (66.7%) majority to 55% majority Imposed several new controls on school districts
Assembly Bill 1908

t t t Legislation passed to implement Proposition 39 Purpose was to defuse opposition arguments against 55% vote Imposed tax rate maximums: Unied School Districts High School/Elementary District t $60 per $100,000 of Assessed Valuation $30 per $100,000 of Assessed Valuation
Reduced number of dates to conduct Proposition 39 elections
97
S e c t i o n
Table 7.2 Comparison between Proposition 46 and Proposition 39/AB1908

Items
Requirement to Call for Bond Election Minimum Armative Votes Facilities Eligible to be Financed with Bonds Purchase of Furniture and Equipment Election Dates
Proposition 46 (66.7% Vote)

Simple Majority Vote of Board Two-Thirds (66.7%) of Votes Cast Purchase or Improvement of Real Property (Purchase of Land, Construction of Buildings, and Acquisition or Construction of Permanent Improvements to Land or Buildings) No Any Tuesday
Proposition 39/AB 1908 (55% Vote)

2/3 Majority Vote of Board 55% of Votes Cast Construction, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, or Replacement of School Facilities, and the Acquisition or Lease of Real Property Yes Coincide with Regularly Scheduled Local Election in Odd-Numbered Years or in Even-Numbered Years t t First Tuesday in June First Tuesday after First Monday in November
Maximum Annual Tax Per Bond Election Based on Projected Assessed Valuation and Interest Rate over Life of Bond - Actual Tax Rate Could Be Higher Accountability Requirements
Not Limited. Tax is Determined Annually Based on Bond Payment and Assessed Value
Unied Districts - $60 per $100,000 of Assessed Valuation High School/Elementary Districts - $30 per $100,000 of Assessed Valuation List of the specic projects to be funded from Bonds An annual Performance Audit An annual Financial Audit Independent committee appointed by Governing Board Review and report on the expenditure of Bond proceeds District to provide technical and administrative assistance Membership of at least seven members, representing business community, seniors, taxpayers, parents, and PTA Members limited to two consecutive two year terms No committee membership for school employees, ocials, vendors, contractors, or consultants to school district Public meetings subject to the Brown Act
None except expenses limited to real property acquisitions and improvements
Citizens Oversight Committee
None required
Charter School Funding Evaluate safety, class size reduction and Information Technology
None None
Make available facilities reasonably equivalent to district facilities for in-district students with/without bond measure Board must certify these issues were considered
98
F A C I L I T I E S
M A S T E R
P L A N
Proposition 39 Scenarios
Although the District could place a Proposition 46 bond measure on the election ballot, the following scenarios are based on following the requirements of Proposition 39 bond measures which limit the size of the bond measure but only require a 55 percent majority vote, compared to the 2/3 (66.7%) requirement under Proposition 46. The three scenarios that follow are based on annual tax rates ranging from no increase in the current tax rate to an increase of $60 per $100,000 of assessed valuation.
Proposition 39 Tax Rate Extension

Another option would be to request voters to extend the 2011-12 tax rate of $122.03 per $100,000 of assessed value such that the Election of 2012 bond tax rate does not exceed $60 per $100,000 of assessed value (Proposition 39 maximum.) Table 7.4 is a summary of this tax rate extension scenario.
Table 7.4 Proposition 39 Tax Rate Extension

Prospective Issuance Schedule (2) Issue Series A Series B Series C Series D Total
(2)
Proposition 39 Tax Increase

Two options would be to request voters to authorize a new annual tax in an amount of either $30 or $60 (Proposition 39 maximum) per $100,000 of assessed valuation. An increase in the tax rate of $30 would generate $24.46 million in bond proceeds, while a $60 increase would realize $50 million in bond proceeds. Table 7.3 is a summary of when the bonds could be sold in order for the projected taxes to remain at either $30 or $60 per $100,000 of assessed valuation.
Issue Date February 2013 August 2015 August 2018 August 2021
Proceeds $7,500,000 $7,500,000 $7,500,000 $7,500,000 $30,000,000
Table 7.3 Proposition 39 Tax Increase Option

Prospective Issuance Schedule (1) Issue Series A Series B Series C Series D Total
(1)
Assumes interest rate ranging from 7.5% to 8.25% and assessed value growth rate of 0.0% annually though the scal year 2014, and 4.0% annually thereafter.
Issue Date February 2013 August 2015 August 2018 August 2021
$30 New Tax Proceeds $6,115,000 $6,115,000 $6,115,000 $6,115,000 $24,460,000
$60 New Tax Proceeds $12,500,000 $12,500,000 $12,500,000 $12,500,000 $50,000,000
Issuance schedule for illustrative purposes only. Actual amounts and dates will be tailored to the Districts facility needs. Assumes interest rate ranging from 6.5% to 7.5% and assessed value growth rate of 0.0% annually though the scal year 2014, and 4.0% annually thereafter.
99
Every Child, Every Day, Whatever it Takes!

Every Child, Every Day, Whatever It Takes! at theme remains our commitment; we will do whatever it takes to see that every child in our district has the chance to reach their potential! - Marcus P. Johnson, Superintendent Sanger Uni ed School District
Sanger Uni ed
S cho o l District
August 28, 2012
Facilities Master Plan

Sanger Facilities Master Plan

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Sanger Facilities Master Plan

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Sanger Uni ed

Facilities Master Plan

Every Child, Every Day,

| Sanger Unied School District

Facilities Task Force

| |Sanger Sanger Unied Unied School School District District

C O N T E N T S | Sanger Unied School District

SECTION 7 | Financing the Facilities Master Plan ............................88

This page was intentionally left blank

| Overview of the Facilities Master Plan Process

SECTION 1 | Overview of the Facilities Master Plan Process:

The Three-Part Trifecta of an FMP

| Sanger Unied School District

O V E R V I E W O F T H E FA C I L I T I E S M A S T E R P L A N P R O C E S S | Sanger Unied School District

| Overview of the Facilities Master Plan Process

The Expanded Four-Part Facilities Master Planning Process

Costs Facilities Master Plan

| Sanger Unied School District

O V E R V I E W O F T H E FA C I L I T I E S M A S T E R P L A N P R O C E S S | Sanger Unied School District

Importance of Quality School Facilities

This page was intentionally left blank

SECTION 2 | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Table 2.1 Summarized Facilities Needs Total

| Sanger Unied School District

S U M M A R Y | Sanger Unied School District

Existing School Facilities Needs

Table 2.2 Summarized Existing School Facilities Needs

TABLE 2.3 Projected Enrollment 2021-2022 School Year

CHART 2.1 Sum of Schools Total District K-12

| Sanger Unied School District

S U M M A R Y | Sanger Unied School District

New School Facility Needs

District Facilities Needs

Table 2.4 Summarized New School Facility Needs

Table 2.5 Summarized District Facilities Needs

Financing the Capital Facilities Master Plan

Table 2.6 Funding Sources

| Sanger Unied School District

S U M M A R Y | Sanger Unied School District

Need to Establish Priorities in Implementing the FMP

This page was intentionally left blank

3 | Existing School Facilities Needs

SECTION 3 | EXISTING SCHOOL FACILITIES NEEDS:

| Sanger Unied School District

E X I S T I N G S C H O O L F A C I L I T I E S N E E D S | Sanger Unied School District

Existing School Facilities Needs

CENTERVILLE ELEMENTARY 48 S. Smith Avenue

BUILDING DESIGNATIONS Existing

| Sanger Unied School District

EXISTING SCHOOL FACILITIES NEEDS

| CENTERVILLE ELEMENTARY MASTER PLAN

$344,258 $513,712 $857,970

Available State Funds

TOTAL LOCAL FUNDS REQUIRED

Existing School Facilities Needs

DEL REY ELEMENTARY 10620 E. Morro Avenue

BUILDING DESIGNATIONS Existing

| Sanger Unied School District

E X I S T I N G S C H O O L F A C I L I T I E S N E E D S | DEL REY ELEMENTARY

Available State Funds

TOTAL LOCAL FUNDS REQUIRED

Existing School Facilities Needs

FAIRMONT ELEMENTARY 3095 N. Greenwood Ave.

BUILDING DESIGNATIONS Existing