"Future of Fayetteville High School Select Committee-II Recommendation"
Future of Fayetteville High School Select Committee-II Recommendation April 24, 2008 Our Charge The primary charge of the Future of Fayetteville High School Select II Committee is to make a recommendation to the Fayetteville Board of Education regarding the future location of Fayetteville High School. Discussion points Work of the committee Potential site options Site selection criteria Recommendation The Work of the FHS-II Committee 14 total meetings (the first one on January 22, 2008, the last one on April 23 - yesterday) 2 public input sessions (230+ in attendance; 90+ addressed the committee) Countless email, phone calls, personal contacts, etc. 545 hours combined (does not include individual time reviewing data, responding to patron inquiries, emails, etc.) The Work of the FHS-II Committee 2 meetings w/ City of Fayetteville staff re: traffic/road improvement projects, trail plans Lisa Morstad, CFO, re: school finance, comparison of options (2 meetings) Wes Burgess and David Swearingen, Crafton Tull Sparks, re: site feasibility, construction and renovation options (3 meetings) Enrollment projections; maps of student distribution The Work of the FHS-II Committee State standards and guidelines for facilities Student enrollment growth rate 14 potential sites considered/reviewed; 8 sites toured. Tours of FHS, Rogers Heritage High site (currently under renovation) Approximately 25 pizzas consumed; significant caffeine intake Potential site options Current FHS campus (committee tour) With assistance from architects, contractors and City of Fayetteville staff, we searched Fayetteville city limits for undeveloped properties of 50 acres+ Identified 14 potential sites, regardless of availability, price, etc. Researched ownership, availability, price, suitability for construction, floodplain issues, etc. Toured 8 sites (Saturday bus ride) Site Options (Potential High School sites in green) Potential site options Yes, we looked at the UofA System agri farm property and met with the Division of Agriculture VP, Dr. Milo Shult. The property is not available for sale, trade, etc. Received Marinoni proposal – 70 acres at Wedington and I-540 Narrowed the list to 4 potential sites; primarily based on availability and suitability for construction Current FHS Site Deane Solomon Site Morningside Drive Site Marinoni Site Criteria Selection Started with 83 suggested criteria to use in evaluating potential locations, including input from the committee members and suggestions gathered during the public input meetings. Grouped those into 4 broad categories – Ideal learning environment for students – Proximity – Safety and transportation – Durability and cost Criteria Selection Small groups worked to combine, eliminate, re-word/revise; narrowed down to 16 criteria Presented criteria to the full committee; more discussion, revision, elimination; narrowed the list to 10 final criteria Each committee member then voted on top 5 Criteria weighted by importance (1-10) Criteria Selection Important note: criteria were developed, finalized and weighted independent of site considerations At this point, the 4 sites under consideration were evaluated via the established criteria. Criteria (Top Rated) 1. Lowest cost to taxpayers (successful millage campaign is imperative) 2. Space sufficient for all programs (expanded educational opportunities) 3. Proximity to student demographic center (near Old Wire Rd. and Mission Blvd.) Criteria (Important) 4. Aesthetics (beauty and functionality) 5. 2025 Plan alignment 6. Parking and traffic manageable (due to increased traffic volume w/ 9th grade) 7. Impact of construction on students Criteria (Lesser Importance) 8. Emergency services response time/access 9. Access to University of Arkansas 10. Road access/infrastructure costs Potential sites measured via criteria Criteria (weighted highest to lowest 1-10) Current Morningside Deane Solomon Marinoni 1. Least cost to taxpayers - + + ? 2. Space for all programs - + + - 3. Proximity to student demographic + + - + center 4. Aesthetics (beauty & functionality) ? ? ? ? 5. 2025 Plan Alignment + + ? + 6. Parking/Access (additional traffic - + - - w/addition of 9th grade) 7. Construction impact (staging area, loss - + + + of parking, staging area, noise, disruption, etc. 8. Emergency services (goal: 4 minutes + + - + response time) 9. Access to U of A + + - + 10.Road access/infrastructure costs + + - + Potential sites measured via criteria Criteria (weighted highest to lowest 1-10) Current Morningside 1. Least cost to taxpayers - ($94M; 6-8 mills) + ($52M; 3-5 mils) 2. Space for all programs - (40 acres; 650,000 s.f.) + (88 acres; 471,000 s.f.) 3. Proximity to student demographic + + center 4. Aesthetics (beauty & functionality) ? ? 5. 2025 Plan alignment + + 6. Parking/Access (additional traffic w/ - (700-1000 pkg. spaces + (1200+ pkg. spaces) addition of 9th grade) w/possible variance) 7. Construction impact (staging area, loss - (4 yrs.+; ) + (none) of parking, staging area, noise, disruption, etc.) 8 Emergency services (goal: 4 minutes + (appropriate response time) + (appropriate response time) response time) 9. Access to U of A + (3 blocks, walking distance) + (1.7 miles, biking/driving) 10. Road access/infrastructure costs + (not conclusive; possibly no + ($2.5M in likely cost) improvements) The Committee’s Recommendation Based on criteria developed and weighted, data researched and examined, questions asked and answered, the FHSSC2 makes the following recommendation: The new Fayetteville High School should be built on the property referred to as “Morningside” (701 E. Huntsville Rd.). Rationale for Recommendation The Morningside Site best matched our selection criteria.