08-26-03 SLCSB Special Meeting - New High School Design

?THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ST. LUCIE COUNTYSpecial Meeting - August 26, 2003MINUTESThe School Board of St. Lucie County held a special meeting in the School Board Room on August 26, 2003 at approximately 4:30 p.m. PRESENT: DR. JOHN CARVELLI, Chairman Member Residing in District No. 3 MS. CAROL A. HILSON, Vice Chairman Member Residing in District No. 2 DR. SAMUEL S. GAINES Member Residing in District No. 5 MRS. KATHRYN HENSLEY Member Residing in District No. 4 DR. JUDI MILLER Member Residing in District No. 1 ALSO PRESENT: MR. MICHAEL J. LANNON, District SuperintendentNEW HIGH SCHOOL DESIGN CONCEPT WORKSHOPChairman Carvelli opened the meeting and referred to the agenda prepared by Mr. Marty Sanders, Executive Director of Facilities & Maintenance. There were six areas for discussion: 1) Reuse of Plans or Special Design; 2) Site Layout Configuration; 3) Athletic Programs; 4) Educational Specifications; 5) Building Design, and 6) Budget Considerations.Mrs. Hensley commented that it would be difficult for the Board to decide on a design until it had chosen a site. The curriculum was unknown at this time and that should drive the design of a school. Dr. Carvelli agreed to delay discussion on item #1. Mr. Lannon stated that when staff got to a point where classrooms would be discussed, they would involve educational professionals to work on the design. In terms of an overall design, Mr. Lannon asked board members to tell staff what they wanted--single story, spread campus or courtyard. The planning would move from form to function and then the right people would come up with the function--that would require multiple meetings.Other comments from board members included - Don’t spread it out from a fiscal and safety perspective; cut down on supervision needs. - Review what multi-story buildings would cost. - Size could range from 1800 to 2000 students. Consider smaller learning communities. - Land was at a premium and would be the largest cost. - Need genuine meetings where suggestions are considered. Need teacher input. - Don’t leave process too open ended. Need guidelines so people can work creatively while still considering affordability of building. - The Board’s job is to help with RFP guidelines. - When planning a previous school design, there was some curriculum planning that actually was put into the design but wasn’t utilized once the school was built. That was a problem the Board needed to consider and not repeat. - Suggested RFP say the Board wanted a design process to include educators, building representatives and guidelines. What about community-based process? - Districts needed something less fluid with it came to the specifics when they go out in the real world. The Board would have to build several schools unless DOE gave information on what will or will not change. The long-term effect is the most difficult to deal with. Hopefully DOE will understand the need for specificity. - The design needed to be able to compete. Look at wireless sound, lighting, easily supervised security systems. Use technology with potential to grow in the future. - Need a national law on equity. - As programs are developed, look at workforce (use Dept. of Labor stats). - Develop standards and options to match children and what they can do. - Look at the definition of a magnet school. - Look at Fort Pierce Central High and Fort Pierce Westwood High (prototypes).Mr. Sanders stated the development of educational specifications was crucial more so than what the school would look like. As well as recognizing there was a need for flexibility, the district had to design under a new constitutional amendment--can’t build large classrooms but need maximum flexibility when the next rule changes. The district had to build schools for fifty years.Mrs. Hensley asked if a K-8 would meet the projected growth for the next ten years or would another elementary school be needed. Mr. Sanders indicated that DOE numbers underestimated growth in the district and the cohort survival method did not include all demographics of people moving here. The district needed to have a DOE forecast. The district will need two high schools, 2 middle schools and some additional elementary student stations due to class size reduction.The question of using prototype schools was discussed. During the year, staff would have lots of demographic work to do. With class size reduction, it was almost impossible to plan using different FISH requirements. Districts needed more direct assistance for facility planners. It appeared there was consensus on the maximum size of 2000 - 2500. It was suggested that under chosen programs should not be duplicated. Staff was asked to develop some views of types of plans and the Board would look at them. Look at comprehensive study to include extra curricular programs, student needs, gender equity. Bring plans back with costs attached.Dr. Gaines was pleased to hear that the district had 21st century people on board. There would always be funding problems and restraints but it was time to build whatever is necessary for the district’s students.Discussion ended and Chairman Carvelli adjourned the workshop at approximately 5:55 p.m. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download