OYSTER RIVER COOPERATIVE SCHOOL DISTRICT
HIGH SCHOOL SPACE NEEDS STUDY COMMITTEE

May 30, 1996 Oyster River High School 7:00 pm

MEMBERS PRESENT:

John Aber, Cozette Carroll, Al Elwell, Cynthia Nizarri-McClain, David Nichols (9:10), Dave Penniman, George Rief, Bill Schoonmacker, Ann Welsh

OTHERS PRESENT:

None

ABSENT:

David Brown, John Lewis, John Randall

CALL TO ORDER:

Chairman Rief called the meeting to order at 7:25 pm

Minutes.

Action on Minutes of the meeting of May 21, 1996 [copy attached] was deferred to the next scheduled meeting on June 11, 1996 to allow the membership time to read and validate same.

Long-Range Planning Committee.

Mr. Rief asked Ms. Nizarri-McClain to request of LRPC Chairperson Bencks that his committee consider naming an alternate representative to the High School Space Needs Study Committee. Cynthia will report at the next HSSNSC meeting.

Split Sessions/Year-round Schools.

Due to a scheduling conflict, Mr. Nichols was not present in time to offer a report. The item was deferred to the June 11 meeting.

RFQ/RFP.

Mr. Rief reviewed the need to address human and fiscal resource needs of the committee: namely, (a) to be able to engage a qualified architect as consultant (human resource) to the HSSNSC, (b) to determine an appropriate budget (fiscal resource) for the services of an architect, and (c) establish timelines for required deliverables.

In response to the committee's request of May 21, Mr. Schoonmaker submitted two documents to the membership for its consideration: (1) The QBS Process and Model, and (2) draft of a Request for Qualifications/Proposal [copy attached]. Mr. Schoonmacker explained the process for identifying potential architects (RFQ/RFP) and the scope of work envisioned by the committee. Mrs. Welsh asked for guidance in conveying to the school board an estimate of the cost for such services. Mr. Schoonmaker indicated a range of $75-80 per hour for 40-60 hours, depending on the scope of services, or estimated total of $4,800. Mrs. Welsh noted she would carry that message to the board at its next scheduled meeting on June 5.

Mr. Rief suggested the following tasks should be addressed by the consulting architect: (a) delineate the options suggested by the HSSNSC, (b) assess the technical and financial feasibility of each option, (c) be able to address to some degree the accuracy of any probable cost of each option, and (d) identify a dollar factor to be attributed to contingency, such as cost times 1.20. Several members of the committee noted that the study should also encompass a 'complete' site plan including athletic fields, parking, land acquisition and/or use of available acreage.

It was agreed that the parameters of the task assigned to the architect should not venture very dramatically from the most recent studies (e.g., 1992-93 Report). However, it was expected that the new study would (1) validate recent work on space needs including design options, site analysis and cost, (2) correlate physical plant needs and optional designs with current educational program goals and needs, and (3) incorporate current technology as well as instructional technology alternatives into the immediate future. Mr. Schoonmaker suggested that architects be expected to respond to three options related to enrollment growth -- 850 enrollment with 1150 core, 850/850, and 1150/1150 -- as well as costs and suggested phases for funding each alternative. Mr. Penniman also suggested alternatives with and without auditorium options be investigated.

Mrs. Welsh noted that a constituent had suggested that, in lieu of a major expansion on the current ORHS site, perhaps a smaller, 200 student 'magnet school' might be an option worthy of consideration. She was aware of such a school in Amherst, MA, and volunteered to contact same to obtain further information.

The committee agreed that the RFQ process would be channelled through Mr. Everngam, SAU Business Administrator, and that subsequent interviews with qualified firms be held by the committee itself with Mr. Everngam serving as advisor. Mr. Everngam would (a) send a RFQ to a list of potentially qualified venders, soliciting their interest in the project, the RFQ accompanied by a letter from the HSSNSC Chairman, and (b) forward an informational packet with RFP specifications to qualified venders.

Timeline.

The committee established a tentative timeline for key tasks as follows:

6/17/96	RFQ/RFP process initiated
7/10/96*	architect selected/retained by board
9/17/96	initial schematics developed
10/16/96	committee report to the school board
*Note: Board scheduled to meet Tues, 7/16, not Wed, 7/lO.

Teacher Input.

Mr. Elwell distributed a comprehensive space and facility needs 'wish list' developed and reported by the ORHS administration and faculty on April 15, 1992.

Advisory Council.

Mr. Elwell suggested the committee might wish to view a video, produced in 1995 by the Advisory Council, which captured essential elements of the high school's Vision and its restructuring initiative. Arrangements will be made for a showing at the June 11 HSSNSC meeting.

Agenda Planning.

June 11
report on split sessions and year-round schools (Nichols) LRPC report on enrollment projections (Nizarri-McClain) Advisory Council Report incl. video showing (Rous, et al) NEASC progress report (Nichols, et al) student input to the committee (Carroll, Welsh)
June 26
review RFQ responses and RFP proposals
synthesis of work-to-date
July 17
selection of architect as consultant to the HSSPNSC

Housekeeping.

Mr. Elwell distributed a revised (5/22/96) committee membership list. Mr. Rief offered his FAX number (868-7289) to facilitate transmission of materials to the chair.

Adjournment. There being no further business to come before the committee, Chairman Rief adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p.m.

Interim Recording Secretary,
Al Elwell

Attachments

OROL Home