Maybe it is and maybe it isn’t more expensive to restore than rebuild, but when a consultant tells a government body exactly what they wanted to hear — and there’s money tied to their findings, to boot — I get skeptical.
STS Consultants told the School Board yesterday “it would cost $8.36 million just to bring the [Glen Oak School] building up to code. Replacing the school with a building of the exact same size would cost $7.95 million,” reports Clare Jellick who adds later, “The studies are part of a process to secure money to build new schools.”
I’ve requested a copy of the study through the Freedom of Information Act. I’d be curious to know what exactly is included in the $7.95 million “building of the exact same size.” For instance, I wonder if it’s a brick building (like Glen Oak is now), or cheaper siding. I also wonder what they mean by “bring[ing] the building up to code.” Does that mean the city code or the State Board of Education’s code?
I’ve also written to STS Consultants asking for examples of historic renovation work they’ve done. From their website, I couldn’t find any evidence that they’ve ever done any historic renovation, but perhaps they just don’t advertise it. If they haven’t done any historic restoration, I would want to know if they consulted a specialist in that field when preparing their study for District 150. It makes a difference.
I understand the issues of modernizing an ancient relic such as Glen Oak School and how “important” it is to a child’s education to have a state-of-the-art facility on a sprawling campus. However, isn’t one of the many reasons why the 150 BOE wishes a new school for Glen Oak is that the current facility simply isn’t big enough to accomplish all they want it to?
So why, then, are they concerned with what it will cost to build a new building of exactly the same size? Shouldn’t the focus be on what a larger facility would cost? Or is their point that a renovated AND expanded facility would just be prohibitive, what with the increases in administrative salaries and all….
Martha — It all has to do with the money. The State of Illinois allows school boards to sell bonds and levy a tax to pay for them (up to a certain percentage of EAV) without voter approval to make what are known as “health, life, and safety” improvements to schools. In order to qualify for these bonds when replacing a school building, they have to prove that the renovation cost would exceed the replacement cost. This is actually part of the Illinois School Code (105 ILCS 5/17-2.11):
Emphasis was mine there, but as you can see, they have to do a comparison based on the same size building. It’s all about getting the money without having to go to the voters.
The headline in today’s paper was little more than a tawdry ploy to exculpate Hinton’s behavior and actions in the GOS/GOP fiasco. Hinton never intended to renovate the existing Glen Oak Primary School or build a new 66,800 sq.ft. replacement structure. His intent was always to build the 80,000 sq. ft. – 120,000 sq. ft. structure of his dreams.
Wake up, Ken, we Peorians are nowhere near as gullible as you think we are.
Wake up, Ken, we Peorians are ready for a Superintendent who possesses the qualities of integrity, honesty, forthrightness, vision, intelligence and objectivity.
Wake up, Ken, you don’t have those qualities!
STS Consultants can build a Home Depot … surely they know how to renovate a historic building.
End sarcasm.
Check out this link of what they did in Oshkosh, Wisconsin …
http://www.stsconsultants.com/projects/site_dev/oshkosh_riverside.html
Looks like they have experience LEVELING historic buildings, although the end result probably is more aesthetically pleasing in that particular case.
Why is the Glen Oak School building “historic”? Has it been designated “Historic”? I know it has a history but the fact is it’s a very old building with wood trusses, old wiring that has been patched and updated over the years, very old heating system (one room is hot, others are cold), asbestos everywhere, and under years of repaint, lead paint.
Really, what is wrong with putting the building out of its misery? No matter who they got to evaluate the building, some people will not be happy. You all don’t want “palaces” built yet you question if the new building is going to include bricks or be like a Lowe’s. You all don’t want a bigger school in the park yet no one has offered where they can build a new school for the East Bluff. It has to be a bigger school and a bigger school (with a single story floor plan) will simply not fit at the current site. If you build a multiple story building, then you have to consider the handicapped students and teachers and include things like elevators. It has to be fully handicap accessible by Federal law.
I think, and I hope that one thing everyone can agree on is that the East Bluff needs a new school but the way people talk they want it with no cost, at the same location, in the same building. Well you all have that now.
Some people don’t think that new or newer school buildings help a child learn in anyway. I agree but when parents are looking for a place to live, newer school buildings do influence their decisions as if you are buying a house and the school your kid is going to looks 100 yrs old, then you are going to look closer. Well most would look closer, others would simply look elsewhere. This is the same mindset that the media puts on everyone when it comes to selling anything like cars. “You just won’t look good unless you’re riding in a new Escalade!” It’s all about perception and unfortunately, District 150 suffers huge image problems. I don’t see anything wrong with wanting to update and modernize all schools and dump century old buildings, consolidate schools into larger newer buildings, and streamline services offered. Yes it costs money and money will be spent but for crying out loud, you are not going to please every single person out there. So please, what is it you want exactly with Glen Oak School? I don’t consider the few people that blog or post here the majority in this issue. I’d like to think that the majority of people in Peoria want a new school and I think they want it in the park location. That is yet to be seen. I do respect the inform opinions I read here and on other blogs including my own (which is sometimes tongue in cheek) so spell it out clearly so the lay person can understand. Very few people are interested in numbers, it bores them, and they just go elsewhere, like Dunlap. Before you all flame me, please try and understand what I am saying as something as to be done and time is not on District 150’s side in this issue.
Sometimes objections to a project are not just about the project itself but how it was handled. A careful reading of blog comments indicates that is what we are dealing with here.
C.J. summed it up nicely yesterday – they have to quit operating behind closed doors and bring it into the light of day. What is wrong with forming a study group or commission comprised of district staff and community members with the express purpose of studying enrollments and facility capacities/conditions, and then having the group make recommendations to the BOE for streamlining services and consolidating facilities based upon their findings and deliberations? Does it take time, of course it does, but it also includes the district’s stakeholders as participants in the decision-making process. The citizens of our community have to believe they are a part of the process, and have a voice that is listened to with respect.
Or, the BOE and Superintendent can just keep on operating in secrecy and we can expect more gridlock. It is their choice.
“When a consultant tells a government body exactly what they wanted to hear.” Gee, this sounds just like the museum! O.k., maybe the museum group is not a government body, but I see many similarities in the way both [the school and museum] projects are being handled.
Emtronics, what the hell are you talking about? If you were moving into the Glen Oak school area as a parent you would be purchasing or renting a home that is every bit as old as the school. I can just see the parents now thinking that they might live in a 100 year old home, but god forbid their kid is sure not going to go to school in a 100 old building. Yep, I would live in a old home, but if my kid does not get a NEW school then we will just have to move to a new home in Dunlap. Sorry I need to be polite but that is just stupid.
Emtronics raised an interesting point about what parents want in a school when looking for a place to live. Perhaps what parents want is a school system that prepares their child to successfully compete after graduating from high school. For some parents who dream of Ivy League educations, this means having their child prepared to compete for places in top tier private colleges and universities; for others, it means having their child prepared to compete for entry into many of our outstanding public universities; and for others, it means having their child prepared to compete for entry into the vocational/technical programs offered at the junior college level.
But does District 150 prepare our children to successfully compete? The report in this morning’s paper about the AYP indicates there are still many problems to be resolved. If the children can’t read at grade level, or do math at grade level, how does the district intervene to correct the problem? If the children continue to lag behind, how will they compete for entry into any college-level program? Perhaps this is why so many parents who can afford to, employ private tutors to prepare their children for college entrance exams. A quick look through a junior college catalog reveals that for programs in mechanics, office technology, manufacturing technology, etc., the students must possess a certain proficiency in math, science, and writing. If students reading comprehension is behind grade level, how can they handle the more complex material (academic or technical) presented in a college setting?
It is about perception – the perception of quality. New construction alone does not ensure a quality education is provided. Can it enhance a successful program, of course. Will it be more appealing to parents and students, yes. But if the district is not providing a quality education to the children of Peoria, does it really matter what the packaging looks like?
Emtronics, It’s cheaper to build up — even with an elevator — than to build out. But regardless, the city has offered money to help with property acquisition and has even agreed to vacate streets to provide the district with up to 10 acres of land at the current Glen Oak School site. So there’s plenty of space available — with generous help from the city to boot. The park board already said no to the school district, so that’s not even an option anymore. And while I agree that the commenters on my blog don’t represent a majority of Peorians, every neighborhood organization on the East Bluff and the Neighborhood Alliance are for putting the school on the current Glen Oak School site whether the current building there can be reused or not. I would consider that a majority.
If you haven’t already, I suggest reading “Why Johnny Can’t Walk to School” by the National Trust for Historic Preservation. It’s a free PDF download and worth the read.
Anyone find it interesting that Lincoln Middle school was on the list of failing schools today in the PJS? I know this is just for disabled students that the testing was for. However, I find it ironic that a “newer, suburban” style school would have anything failing. It seems as though too much emphasis on buildings, rather than curiculum.
I just can’t believe that G.O.S. needs more in rehibilitation than a new building costs. How about a material comparison between the new and old building.
I will say in regards to the recent “failing” grades for certain D150 schools … this was due to special needs kids not making AYP. Special needs kids are identified as a group by the No Child Left Behind Act, and if ANY of these specified groups fails, the school fails. However, this is one of the biggest weaknesses and criticisms of the NCLBA. It tests these kids at their AGE level, not their DEVELOPMENTAL level. I’m sure D150 has many kids in the junior high age group that are operating at less than a kindergarten level developmentally because of their disabilities. That’s completely unfair. It makes me think that the NLCBA was designed to deep-six the whole public education system in this country, not improve it.
If you accept their $7.95 Million for the new construction, factor in the 50% cost overruns that are inevitable with such a project, it is obvious that renovating the existing building (“relic” my foot, it’s a beautiful well-built building, and will still be standing long after the poorly constructed “modern” monstrosities have been bulldozed) is more economical, not to mention it will result in a much more child-friendly school – or do you think kids prefer ugly buidings designed by the same people who design jails,and just recylcle the drawings?
Lincoln Middle School has been in trouble for quite a while, they are in restructuring status, the worst ranking available. This illustrates what curriculum & instruction experts have said all along, and that is new buildings do not correlate with an increase in student achievement.
While special services students are part of the mix and therefore part of the problem, Lindbergh and Jefferson have large populations of special needs children and those schools are meeting AYP standards. Fact of the matter is, special needs kids are present in each of the district’s schools; not all special needs children have learning disabilities. To cite the special needs kids as the main reason for AYP not being met may be somewhat of an oversimplification.
PrairieCelt,
By disclosing the fact that Lindbergh and Thomas Jefferson, which have special needs children also, but are meeting AYP has effectively blown a hole in the “poor King Hinton” argument that it “just isn’t fair”. Shame on you! ^oo^~
There is something else to consider when discussing AYP. If you accept the premise that if a child is reading behind grade level at 1st grade, and nothing is done to help the child improve, then that child will enter 2d grade lagging behind. By the time the child is ready for middle school, assuming that nothing has been done to assist the child, that child will be lagging far behind his/her classmates in reading (of course, the same holds true for math).
That said, it is logical to conclude that reading or math instructional interventions need to occur as early as possible to keep children performing at the appropriate grade level.
Let’s look at a sample of the district’s primary and middle schools. Whittier met AYP in both 2005 & 2006. The Whittier kids go on to attend Calvin Coolidge. The Coolidge kids met AYP standards both years. You might conclude that the quality of instruction achieved at Whittier is matched by the quality of instruction at Coolidge.
Let’s look at a different example. The students at Harrison failed to meet AYP both years. Those students attend Trewyn, and the Trewyn students failed to meet AYP both years. Pretty much what you might expect. Obviously, there are problems at the primary school that require serious attention.
Woodrow Wilson kids met AYP standards both years – those kids go on to attend Sterling; but Sterling failed to meet AYP both years. What happened? Yes, there is a large special ed population – the hearing impaired program is housed at Sterling. But hearing impaired kids do not necessarily have learning disabilities. Sterling has pretty much the standard mix of BD and LD kids, who you might anticipate would not perform at grade level. But what happened to all the regular division kids? Something else is going on there; the quality of instruction needs to be monitored, instructional interventions delivered to the students who are lagging behind, and perhaps some intense staff development is needed for the reading/language arts and math staffs.
If the primary school students are failing to make adequate yearly progress in reading and/or math, the corresponding middle school certainly won’t be able to meet AYP standards. So, the district needs to focus its attention and resources to fixing the problems with instruction at the primary school level first.
If the kids aren’t performing at the appropriate grade level in primary school, what chance do they have for success in middle or high school?